BOARD OF EXAMINERS REPORT
N C A T E ______National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education
ACCREDITATION VISIT TO:
Teachers College, Columbia University New York City April 2-6, 2005
NCATE Board of Examiners Team:
Kathleen deMarrais, Chair Hilary Freedman Albert Koppes Doreen Jankovich Jeanneine Jones Tina Marshall-Bradley Michael Morehead
State Consultant: Richard Gervais
Type of Visit
First _X_ Continuing ___ Combination ___ Probation ___ Focused (on standard(s) not met) ___
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction 4
II. Conceptual Framework 11
III. Findings for Each Standard
Standard 1 16
Standard 2 31
Standard 3 41
Standard 4 47
Standard 5 56
Standard 6 63
IV. Sources of Evidence 72
V. Corrections to the Institutional Report
2 SUMMARY FOR PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION UNIT NCATE 2000 Standards
Institution: Teachers College-Columbia University
Team Findings Standards Initial Advanced
1 Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions M M
2 Assessment System and Unit Evaluation M M
3 Field Experiences and Clinical Practice M M
4 Diversity M M
5 Faculty Qualifications, Performance, and M M Development
6 Unit Governance and Resources M M
M = Standard Met NM = Standard Not Met
3 INTRODUCTION
A. The institution
Located on the upper west side of Manhattan in New York City, Teachers College, Columbia University, is an independent graduate and professional school of education, psychology, and health. It has been affiliated with Columbia University since 1898 but operates as a separate corporation with its own endowment, Board of Trustees, and president responsible for general oversight of its affairs and for its financial support.
Teachers College draws its students from all over the United States and globally. The population demographics of the city of New York and the borough of Manhattan where the institution is located and where the unit has partnerships with the urban schools are provided in Table 1:
Table 1. New York City Census Data 2000 Census Demographics New York City Manhattan Borough Number % Number % Total Population 8,008,278 100% 1,537,195 100 White (non-Hispanic) 2,801,267 35% 703,873 45.8 African American 1,962,154 24.5% 234,698 15.3% Asian/Pacific Islander 783,058 9.8% 143,863 9.4% American Indian/Alaskan 58,775 .7% 2,465 0.2% Native Other Non-Hispanic 225,149 2.8% 5,536 0.4% Non-Hispanic (2 or more races) ------28,944 1.9% Hispanic Origin 2,160,554 27 417,816 27.2%
In 1887, Teachers College was founded by philanthropist Grace Hoadley Dodge and philosopher Nicholas Murray Butler to provide “a new kind of schooling for the teachers of the poor children of New York; their approach combined a humanitarian concern to help others with a scientific approach to human development. Teachers College has a long history of attracting prominent scholars who shared the belief in the “power of education to make the world more just and humane.” These prominent educators include John Dewey, William Kilpatrick, Edward Lee Thorndike, Lawrence Cremin, Maxine Greene, and Linda Darling-Hammond. The unit continues to have as a core function the preparation of teachers and other school personnel for careers in urban school systems.
B. The unit
In 2004 the unit’s faculty consisted of 156 full-time faculty, of which 22 percent are minority and 60 percent were female. The unit has an additional 57 non-tenure-track full- time faculty members in numerous categories (distinguished practitioner, lecturer, instructor, adjunct, etc.), of which 23 percent are minority and 31 percent are female. In the fall of 2003, there were 5,087 graduate students. Thirty-five percent of all US citizens
4 enrolled were ethnic minority students; nearly 15 percent of the total student body was international students from 78 different countries. Seventy-one percent of all students were enrolled part-time. The median age of all students was 30. Typical of the unit’s approximately 5000 graduate students, about a third are preparing for teacher certification as P-12 teachers, with 400 of these performing internships or students teaching each semester in New York City’s public schools.
The unit offers degrees in Master of Arts, Master of Science, Master of Education, Doctor of Education, and Doctor of Philosophy in more than 65 different academic programs for novice and experienced practitioners within the following nine departments:
* Arts and Humanities * Biobehavioral Sciences * Counseling and Clinical Psychology * Curriculum and Teaching * Health and Behavioral Studies * Human Development * International and Transcultural Studies * Mathematics, Science, and Technology * Organization and Leadership
Teachers College has been accredited by the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools since 1921. In November 2002, the Commission reaffirmed the College's accreditation, with the next evaluation visit scheduled for the 2005-2006 academic year.
New York State’s educator preparation policies were significantly changed during the past six years. In 1999, the New York State Board of Regents adopted new regulations for teacher preparation programs and mandated that all classroom teacher preparation programs must be re-registered to comply with these newly adopted regulations. The re- registration process involved a paper review of the program design, faculty credentials, and curricular offerings and, if found in compliance with regulation, the programs receive initial registration approval. All candidates in teacher preparation programs, whether undergraduate or graduate, and completing their program of study after February 1, 2004, would be required to satisfy the new regulatory requirements. The programs offered at Teachers College, Columbia University, and leading to New York State classroom teacher certification, have all been reviewed and re-registered under these new regulations.
In July 2003 new regulations were adopted for preparation programs leading to certification in the areas of School Building Leader, School District Leader and School District Business Leader. These regulations mandated the re-registration of the new school leadership programs in the same manner as the classroom teacher reviews and specified that all candidates completing school leadership programs after September 1, 2006 would be required to satisfy the new regulatory requirements. The leadership programs at Teachers College have been reviewed and registered under these new
5 regulations. The New York State Board of Regents has not adopted new regulations for the Pupil Personnel certificate areas of School Psychologist and School Counselor.
The New York State Education Department (NYSED) has a joint partnership agreement with NCATE that specifies that the teacher preparation institutions must submit program reports to all specialized professional associations (SPAs) that have had their standards adopted by NCATE. Additionally, this partnership provides for the BOE team to include a state consultant. This state presence, provided the accreditation team does not identify significant regulatory compliance issues during their review of the unit against NCATE standards, allows for a determination to be made regarding continued registration of the programs by NYSED.
The unit includes 28 distinct professional education programs offering initial and/or advanced degrees (see Table 2). All of these programs had been reviewed by national SPAs where applicable as mandated by New York State policies.
6 Table 2: Professional Education Programs at Teachers College Program Name Award Program N SPA Status of Program NYS Re-registration Level Level Review Sub Current Status Art and Art Education MA ITP/ADV 75 NA NA NA Art and Art Education (INT/PRF) Art and Art Education (PRF) Bilingual/ Bicultural MA ITP 36 NA NA NA Bilingual/Bicultural Childhood Education (INT/PRF) Education Bilingual/Bicultural Childhood Education Extension (INT/PRF) Bilingual/Bicultural Childhood Education Adv Cert (INT/PRF) Curriculum and Teaching MA ADV 76 NA NA NA Curriculum and Teaching Elementary Education (PRF) Curriculum and Teaching Secondary Education (PRF) Early Childhood MA ITP 24 NAEYC YES Deferred Early Childhood Education (INT/PRF) Education Childhood/Early Childhood Education (INT/PRF) Education Leadership MA ADV 32 ELCC YES Recognized Public School Building Leadership (INT) MA EDM Public School Building Leadership (INT) EDD Inquiry in Education Leadership Practice (INT/PRF) FSAA (INT) Elementary Education MA ITP 104 ACEI YES Not recognized Childhood Education (INT/PRF) Literacy Specialist MA ADV 01 NA NA NA Teaching Literacy (INT/PRF) Mathematics Education MA ITP/ADV 61 NCTM YES Recognized Mathematics 7-12 (INT/PRF) MS Mathematics 7-12 (PRF) MA Mathematics 7-12 (PRF) MS Mathematics 7-12 (PRF) MSED Music and Music MA ITP/ADV 75 NA NA NA Music and Music Education (INT/PRF) Education Music and Music Education (PRF) Physical Education MA ITP/ADV 22 NASPE YES Recognized Physical Education (INT/PRF) Physical Education (PRF) Reading Specialist MA ADV 75 IRA YES Recognized Reading Specialist (INT/PRF) Science Education MA ITP 42 NSTA YES Rejoinder Biology 7-12 (INT/PRF) Chemistry 7-12 (INT/PRF) Earth Science 7-12 (INT/PRF) Physics 7-12 (INT/PRF)
1 Included in the Curriculum and Teaching total count
7 School Counseling EDM ADV 1732 NA NA NA School Counselor (PROV/PERM) School Psychology EDM ADV 96 APA YES Accredited Applied Dev and Learning Psychology: School Psychology EDD NASP Recognized PHD Special Ed: Applied MA ITP 16 CEC YES Recognized Teaching Students with Disabilities—Early Behavior Analysis Childhood/Childhood/Applied Behavior Analysis (INT/PRF) Special Ed: Blindness and MA ITP 7 CEC YES Recognized Blindness and VI/Childhood Education (INT/PRF) Visual Impairment Blindness and VI/Early Childhood Education (INT/PRF) Blindness and VI/Adolescence (INT/PRF) Blindness and VI (INT/PRF) MA Blindness and VI (INT/PRF) MA Blindness and VI (INT/PRF) EDM Special Ed: Deaf and Hard MA ITP 27 CED NO In progress Deaf and HI/Elementary Education (INT/PRF) of Hearing Deaf and HI/Early Childhood Education (INT/PRF) Deaf and HI/Adolescence Education (INT/PRF) Education of Deaf and HI (INT/PRF) Special Ed: Early MA ITP 37 NAYEC YES Deferred Early Childhood Special Education (INT/PRF) Childhood Early Childhood-Special Education (INT/PRF) Special Ed: Gifted Ed MA ADV 10 CEC YES Recognized Gifted Education Extension (INT/PRF) Special Ed: Learning MA ITP/ADV 61 CEC YES Recognized Teaching Students with Disabilities-Learning dis/Abilities (INT/PRF) dis/Abilities Teaching Students with Disabilities-Disability Studies in Education (PRF) Teaching Students with Disabilities-Childhood/Learning dis/Abilities (INT/PRF) Special Ed: Mental MA ITP 22 CEC YES Recognized Mental Retardation/Autism (INT/PRF) Retardation Teaching Students with Disabilities-Childhood/MR/Autism (INT/PRF) Teaching Students with Disabilities-Early Childhood/MR/Autism (INT/PRF) Teaching the Severe and Multiple Handicapped Ann (INT/PRF) Special Ed: Speech and MS ITP 96 ASHA NA Accredited Speech Language Pathology (INT/PRF) Language Pathology Speech Language Pathology Bilingual (INT/PRF) Teaching of ASL MA ITP 16 NA NA NA Teaching ASL (INT/PRF) Teaching of English MA ITP/ADV 153 NCTE YES Recognized Teaching of English (INT/PRF) Teaching of English (PRF)
2 Includes all Counseling Psychology students of which School Counseling is a part
8 TESOL MA ITP 103 TESOL YES Recognized TESOL (INT/PRF) Teaching of Social Studies MA ITP/ADV 81 NCSS YES Not recognized Teaching of Social Studies (INT/PRF) Teaching of Social Studies (PRF) Technology Specialist MA ITP 5 ISTE YES Deferred Technology Specialist, 7-12 (INT/PRF) Peace Corp Fellows MA ITP 03 NA NA NA Alt Cert: Teaching of English (Trans B) Program Alt Cert: ESOL (Trans B) Alt Cert: Early Childhood Special Ed (Trans B) Alt Cert: Bilingual/Bicultural Education (Trans B) Alt Cert: Mathematics Education (Trans B) Alt Cert: Biology 7-12 (Trans B) Alt Cert: Chemistry 7-12 (Trans B) Alt Cert: Earth Science 7-12 (Trans B) Alt Cert: Physics 7-12 (Trans B) Alt Cert: Teaching Students with Disabilities (Trans B)
3 Includes in the total counts of the corresponding subject areas
9
C. The visit
This first accreditation visit followed the state protocol. There were no off-campus programs as part of the review. There were no distance learning programs, but there were 20-25 distance learning courses offered in the fall and spring semesters with another 25 to be offered this summer. In addition, there are another 20 that are web-supported combining face-to-face with web-based instruction. The team reviewed a sampling of the web-based courses with particular focus on the syllabi, activities, and assessments. It was determined that the distance learning courses are comparable in quality to the courses offered on campus.
The state consultant worked closely with the team, providing important state contextual information and assisting with interviews and document analysis. There were no extenuating circumstances that impacted the ability of the team to perform a professional, high quality, and thorough review.
10
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
A. Introduction
“I believe that education is the fundamental method of social progress and reform.” John Dewey, 1897
Painted in large black letters on a cream-colored wall inside the entrance to Teachers College, Dewey’s statement serves as a daily reminder that the historical mission of the institution was to “provide a new kind of schooling for New York City’s poor, one dedicated to helping them improve the quality of their everyday lives.” This mission was recently reaffirmed in response to the difficult problems of urban education in today’s context. In addition the unit is in the process of revising its mission statement as part of the college-wide strategic planning initiative. The new mission statement, steeped in both historical perspective and a view to the future will focus on the following three main themes:
• a commitment to building a better future, especially for urban and underserved populations; • aspirations to advance research, practice and policy about teaching, learning and human development across the lifespan; • a dedication to attracting and supporting a diverse community of students, faculty, and staff intent on learning from their differences and common humanity.
The conceptual framework continues this long tradition of preparing educators to work in the city’s schools as advocates of social justice. In the fall of 2002 the faculty began the development of the unit’s conceptual framework primarily through the work of the Teacher Education Policy Committee (TEPC) and the Teachers College Accreditation Team (TCAT). Since the TEPC is comprised of representatives from all nine departments and representatives from most of the educator preparation programs across the unit, there are typically 20-30 faculty members present at these meetings. Nine meetings and workgroup sessions were held with broad participation. The director of the professional development school served as a liaison between the faculty and school professionals. These meetings both within the committee and with the faculty at large were used to develop and refine the three philosophical stances of the conceptual framework:
Inquiry stance: We are an inquiry-based and practice-oriented community. We and our students and graduates challenge assumptions and complacency and embrace a stance of inquiry toward the interrelated roles of learner, teacher, and leader in P-12 schools.
Curricular stance: Negotiating among multiple perspectives on culture, content, and context, our graduates strive to meet the needs of diverse learners, both students and other adults, in their school communities.
Social justice stance: Our graduates choose to collaborate across differences in and beyond their school communities. They demonstrate a commitment to social justice and to serving the world while imagining its possibilities.
The three stances were then approved by the TEPC and reported to the faculty at its full faculty December 2002 meeting. Over a two-year period, the draft conceptual framework document was
11 sent to all faculty, including clinical/supervising faculty, for comment and was also presented to the student representatives at the Student Senate meeting. The results of these meetings and discussions resulted in refinement, expansion, and completion of the conceptual framework document. In interviews faculty reported that P-12 teachers working with program faculty reviewed and discussed the conceptual framework as part of their program re-registration process required by the state. The faculty accepted the conceptual framework in its final form. The philosophical stances of the conceptual framework then provided the context for the development and refinement of the unit’s five standards as follows:
Standard 1: Inquirers and Reflective Practitioners: Our candidates are inquirers/researchers who have breadth of knowledge and a variety of tools to ask questions about educational environments. They reflect on and continually evaluate the effects of their choices on others (children, families, and other professionals in the learning community).
Standard 2: Lifelong Learners: Our candidates are continually engaged in learning and research. They take responsibility for their professional growth and seek/create learning opportunities for themselves and others.
Standard 3: Learner-Centered Educators/Professionals: Our candidates understand their subject matter/disciplines, learners and learning, and curriculum and teaching. They create learning experiences that foster development and achievement in all students.
Standard 4: Effective Collaborators: Our candidates actively participate in the community or communities of which they are a part to support students' learning and well-being.
Standard 5: Advocates of Social Justice and Diversity: Our candidates are familiar with legal, ethical, and policy issues. They provide leadership in advocating for children, families, and themselves in a variety of professional, political, and policy-making contexts.
The unit’s history, mission statement, college commitments, and five standards were used to identify and articulate the specific six areas of performance-based student outcomes expected of all candidates and embedded into the assessment system:
a) Inquiring into and reflecting on learning and teaching; b) Taking responsibility for one’s and others’ learning; c) Meeting the needs of diverse learners; d) Responding to the realities of school and communities; e) Collaborating with others and participating in the community; f) Advocating for social justice.
These expectations of candidates were further articulated into the specific knowledge, skills, and dispositions required of candidates for work in P-12 schools. The unit’s expectation was that candidates demonstrate the following knowledge, skills, and dispositions:
Knowledge and Understanding of: • Research and inquiry methods and relationships between research and practice • A continuum of lifelong learning and issues of professional concern • Subject-matter/disciplinary content • Learners and learning
12 • Curriculum and teaching • Processes and strategies of effective communication and collaboration • Foundations of democracy, equity, and schooling Skills in: • Self-critique and reflection • Use of research and inquiry methods and application of research to practice • Planning, implementation, and evaluation of professional growth • Planning, implementation, and evaluation of curriculum/services • Communication and collaboration • Addressing inequalities in the classroom, school, and society Dispositions/Commitments to: • Inquiry and reflection • The profession, ethics, and lifelong learning • Leadership • The fullest possible growth and development of all students • Cooperation and collaboration • Social justice and diversity
At the program level, the conceptual framework; unit standards; and specific knowledge, skills, and dispositions of the unit were mapped onto the specific expectations of the programs.
B. Shared vision
This unit’s conceptual framework is consistent with the College's commitment "to enhance human welfare by preparing leaders for those professions seeking to optimize human potential, by inquiring systematically into the process and context of human development in its many forms, and by collaborating with practitioners and policymakers to envision and create a more just and compassionate world.” According to written documentation as well as interviews with faculty, the conceptual framework was shared across all unit faculty. In interviews faculty reported that the conceptual framework was shared with P-12 teachers and the unit’s candidates for review and response. Since the conceptual framework was completed in 2002, it was disseminated to all supervising faculty and cooperating teachers. Each semester through formal program meetings and informal individual meetings with school-based faculty, the conceptual framework principles, course materials that reflect the conceptual framework, and assessment rubric aligned with the conceptual framework are shared and discussed. Members of the TEPC described specific meetings with P-12 faculty and candidates in which they shared the conceptual framework, expectations for candidates, and assessment. A review of the syllabi revealed that the conceptual framework was evident in the courses and assignments across the unit’s programs, thus disseminating the philosophical stances, standards and student outcome throughout the programs.
C. Coherence
The conceptual framework serves as the basis for the unit’s assessment system, curriculum, instruction, field experiences, and clinical experiences. The faculty in the programs mapped all the core courses onto a Master Domain of Learning Outcomes. The syllabi were revised to reflect the stances, unit standards, and student outcomes of the conceptual framework. The faculty reviewed field experiences and clinical practice to assess their coherence to the conceptual framework. The Teacher Education Policy Committee reviewed supervision practices and subsequently named a sub-committee to ensure that supervision of teachers and other school 13 personnel is consistent across the unit and aligned with the conceptual framework. This work is ongoing. In addition, the unit has examined ways the social justice stance is threaded throughout the programs to ensure coherence in that area.
D. Professional commitments and dispositions
As indicated above, the professional commitments and dispositions have been developed from the three stances, standards and learning outcomes and consequently are consistent with the conceptual framework. The unit identified the following six specific dispositions essential to the preparation of their candidates:
• Open-mindedness and Commitment to Inquiry and Reflection • Commitment to the Profession, Ethics, and Lifelong Learning • Commitment to Leadership • Commitment to the Fullest Possible Growth and Development of All Students • Willingness to Collaborate • Respect for Diversity and Commitment to Social Justice
Each program has clearly articulated the ways in which the dispositions are assessed in the six key assessments of the program and the ways the commitments are assessed at the four major decision points within each program.
E. Commitment to diversity
The commitment to diversity is articulated strongly throughout the conceptual framework and the work of the unit. In particular, the philosophical social justice stance focuses the work of the unit on urban and minority issues as well as issues of poverty and educational equity. A review of syllabi and course materials, faculty publications, funded initiatives and centers, as well as field placements in diverse urban schools substantiated the central commitment to diversity across the unit.
For example, the unit’s commitment to diversity was articulated in an education leadership program report that captured both the history of Teachers College and the current ethical stance shared by the faculty in regard to diversity:
John Dewey (1916) stated that the purpose of education was the intellectual, moral, and emotional growth of the individual and, consequently, the evolution of a democratic society. The educators and scholars that have shaped Teachers College’s philosophy believed that education could enlighten democracy, challenge and transform social inequities, and help to build a more humane and just society. We see teaching as an ethical and political act. We see teachers as moral actors whose job is to facilitate the growth and development of other human beings (Villegas & Lucas, 2002), and as such, as participants in a larger struggle for social justice. We build our educational space on principles of access, equity and diversity:
• Education has the power to transform human lives and to shape and guide social order. • Every person has the right to develop his or her intellectual, emotional, and physical capacities to the fullest extent, and a good school or school district promotes such development.
14 Ethical understanding helps educators create and sustain learning communities committed to social justice, equality, and democratic ideals, and provides a lens through which to understand educational goals, issues, and trends (Sobol, 2002).
To further illustrate the unit’s commitment to diversity, in 2003-04 a strategic plan for Teachers College for 2004-2013 was developed by a Strategic Planning Committee, a group representative of the unit’s constituencies, that worked for more than two years to articulate the unit’s goals for the next decade. Within the strategic plan, the unit adopted an institutional focus of educational equity to guide its work for the next ten years. The specific goals of the plan are as follows:
1. We will increase the impact of Teachers College on the fields and the diverse constituencies that it serves. 2. We will reestablish Teachers College as the premier school of education in fact and reputation. 3. We will assure the long-term financial viability of the College. 4. We will improve all aspects of the student experience. 5. We will make the College operate more effectively and continue to honor and cultivate diversity throughout the institution.
The plan consists of 21 specific initiatives for two time periods (now through 2005, 2006 and beyond) that articulate specific steps toward addressing the central focus of educational equity in the U.S. and abroad.
F. Commitment to technology
In 1996 the unit established its Technology Advisory Committee to articulate a set of goals for technology that support the integration of technology throughout the work of the unit in teaching and learning, evaluation, research, and working with P-12 schools. In July 2004 the unit charged a subcommittee of the faculty to develop a new technology plan that aims to articulate short and medium range plans during this academic year. In addition, the unit was involved in a three-year PT3 Grant entitled Technology partners: A Project Approach to Pre-service Technology Infusion, which was completed in 2004. The project had three major goals:
1. To guarantee that our pre-service students graduate from Teachers College with the skills, knowledge, and competencies necessary to teach effectively with technology. 2. To provide all of our pre-service faculty with the skills they need to integrate technology into their courses. 3. To ensure that our pre-service students’ school placements include good experiences using technology in schools.
This project has resulted in the integration of technology in some of the academic and field experience work of the candidates. The unit supports the technology needs of faculty, candidates, and programs through a formal planning process that includes regular upgrading of technology resources. Faculty reported that instructional technology support personnel were available for training and other supports as they integrated technology in their work. However, there was some evidence of inconsistency in the extent to which faculty integrated technology into their instruction (see Standard 5).
G. Candidate proficiencies aligned with professional and state standards
15 The unit standards in the conceptual framework (inquirers and reflective practitioners, lifelong learners, learner-centered educators/professionals, effective collaborators, and advocates of social justice) are thoroughly described and aligned with New York State and INTASC standards. Each of the programs within the unit has aligned its knowledge, skills, and dispositions with the three philosophical stances and the five Teachers College standards. The unit has created a Master Domain of Learning Outcomes (see Standard 2) that illustrates the alignment of these aspects of the conceptual framework. In addition, each program has its own assessment map that illustrates the programs' alignment with unit as well as state standards.
16
STANDARD 1: CANDIDATE KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, AND DISPOSITIONS
Candidates preparing to work in schools as teachers or other professional school personnel know and demonstrate the content, pedagogical, and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn. Assessments indicate that candidates meet professional, state, and institutional standards.
A. Content knowledge for teacher candidates
Initial Programs The professional education unit offers 20 initial teacher preparation programs that have been reviewed by specialized professional associations (SPAs) and other accrediting or approval bodies. The majority of the programs are recognized by their respective specialized professional associations. Strengths of the programs include the conceptual framework, strong theoretical constructs that are related to appropriate standards, and an organized data collection system designed to yield the data required to meet the specific discipline standards. The professional education unit has added initial programs in early childhood education, special education: early childhood education, and technology specialist. The first cohorts will graduate from these programs in spring 2005. The professional education unit also has a long-standing funded project to train Peace Corps volunteers in classroom teaching areas. Individuals in this program are assessed based on the requirements of the specific certification program.
The conceptual framework for the professional education unit identifies the value of graduates demonstrating knowledge of the content they will teach by integrating the arts, humanities and pedagogical practice and by promoting scholarly inquiry into the processes and purposes of education within specialist domains and across interdisciplinary frameworks. Standard three of the conceptual framework requires that candidates understand their subject matter/disciplines, learners and learning, and curriculum and teaching. The unit measures candidates’ ability to create learning experiences that foster development and achievement in all students.
Since September 1993 the state requires that candidates pass two components of the New York State Teacher Certification Examinations (NYSTCE) to acquire an initial certificate. The NYSTCE are assessments of liberal arts areas as measured through the Liberal Arts and Science Test (LAST), general pedagogical skills at the elementary or secondary level as measured by the Assessment of Teaching Skills – Written (ATS-W), and effective February 2, 2004 content knowledge as measured by the Content Specialty Test (CST) for each certification area. As indicated in Table 3, of the 233 candidates in initial programs 96 percent demonstrate content knowledge as measured on the CST for their program area.
Table 3:Unit Pass Rate on Content Tests (initial programs), Academic Year 2003-2004 # taking the tests % passing at state cut score Art and Art Education 9 100% Multi-Subject 52 98% Deaf and Hard of Hearing 4 100% Gifted Education 5 100% Mathematics Education 16 100% Music and Music Education 2 50%
17 # taking the tests % passing at state cut score Physical Education 1 100% Science Education 13 100% Students with Disabilities 23 100% Teaching ASL 3 100% Teaching of English 50 98% TESOL 31 100% Teaching of Social Studies 24 96% All programs 233 96%
Program reports for elementary education, science education and social studies education programs have been presented to their respective specialized professional associations and are not yet nationally recognized. Common themes across the SPA reports include the need for presentation of performance data that address program standards. Interviews with program faculty indicate data are being organized to be presented as a part of the rejoinder process for these programs.
Key measures used by the unit include admission data at the beginning of programs and cumulative projects at the end of the program. Program assessments at decision point 2 and decision point 3 vary based on the program. The unit uses a variety of means for establishing fairness, accuracy, and consistency and eliminating biases on key assessments. Interviews with unit faculty indicate that on all key assessments the score of minimally acceptable on beginning measures for candidates in initial programs is satisfactory as candidates are expected to grow and develop as they matriculate through the program and as they develop as professional educators.
Data from the admissions review summary for initial programs indicate that 74 percent of the candidates across all programs were rated as acceptable or excellent as measured by the admissions rubrics for initial programs. Sample data from the Science Investigation Scoring Rubric indicate that candidates rate between acceptable and excellent in the areas of "understand and can successfully convey to students the major concepts, principles, theories, laws, and interrelationships of their fields of certification and supporting fields as recommended by the National Science Teachers Association"; "understand and can successfully convey to students the unifying concepts of science delineated by the National Science Education standards"; "understand and can successfully convey to students important personal and technological applications of science in their fields of certification"; and "understand research and can successfully design, conduct, and report results."
Candidates in the early childhood program complete a final curriculum project designed to demonstrate their ability to create, conceptualize ways to implement, and evaluate developmentally appropriate, culturally sensitive learning activities for diverse groups of young children. Data from 2003-2004 indicate that 72 percent of candidates meet or exceed expectations in the area of content as measured by the Final Curriculum Project. Twenty-eight percent of candidates “approach expectations.” There are no candidates who do not meet expectations. Candidates have additional opportunities to demonstrate their mastery of content knowledge during their student teaching and in their culminating portfolios.
The initial program for learning dis/abilities requires candidates to complete a Dis/Ability in Action Project and Presentation at decision point 3. Candidates choose one of the following projects: develop a profile of a person with specific attention to dis/ability and the various contexts within which the person’s life and experience is framed; determine the physical and attitudinal barriers to access within their community; or adapt a teaching unit with a dis/ability 18 context. Of the five projects presented in 2003-2004 one project was rated as proficient and four projects were rated as extraordinary in the area of content.
The unit collects data from student teaching evaluations completed by supervising teachers and university faculty. Analysis of data in the area of content knowledge show that 79 percent of candidates are rated by university supervisors and cooperating teachers at the acceptable level and 21 percent are rated at the excellent level on the standards identified by the unit that assess candidates’ content knowledge.
In the spring of 2004 the unit surveyed the 2004 graduating class (N=462). Fifty-seven graduates responded for a return rate of 12 percent. Graduates rate their content knowledge based on the statements on the questionnaire where 4 represents strongly agree and 1 represents strongly disagree. The range of results includes a low of 3.2 in the area of meeting the needs of diverse learners to a high of 3.5 in the areas of critical thinking, inquiry, and reflective practice. The professional education unit recognized these results were based on a low return rate and has developed strategies to increase this return rate on the spring 2005 surveys. These strategies include follow-up correspondence and email reminders to non-responders.
Advanced Program The unit offers eleven advanced teacher preparation programs. The advanced programs which are designed for individuals who have initial certification and seek to extend their ability through inquiry with a strong research focus, are reviewed by the New York State Education Department.
Individuals admitted to advanced programs are assessed based on GPAs from prior programs, GRE scores, scholarly potential/academic credentials and subject area/content knowledge, and/or liberal arts and science background. Data collected at decision point 1 from the admission rubric for advanced programs indicate that 90 percent of the candidates admitted are rated at the minimally acceptable and above levels on scholarly potential/academic credentials and 99 percent of advanced teacher candidates are rated at the minimally acceptable and above levels on subject area/content knowledge and or liberal arts and science background. Mean scores for the GRE for 2003-2004 advanced programs were 547 (verbal), 634 (quantitative), and 642 (analytic). While there are a few candidates at the minimally acceptable levels, the unit makes the decision to admit these students knowing that they will improve over the course of their studies and are monitored as they progress through key decision points. The unit consistently describes incoming candidates as “minimally acceptable” with the understanding that as the candidates progress through the program, their demonstrated knowledge and skills will move into the higher levels of the scales.
Candidates in advanced programs demonstrate content knowledge through reflective journals and papers, research papers/literature reviews, fieldwork/action research projects, and curriculum planning projects (including unit and lesson plans). A sample of rated master’s action research projects in the curriculum and teaching program indicated that candidates identify relevant problems based on situational analyses and sophisticated reflection of social justice issues; collect appropriate data from multiple sources to address problems in imaginative and/or highly effective ways; interpret data from multiple perspectives, supported by relevant literature; plan alternate courses of action and take substantive, appropriate action based on thoughtful reflection of findings; assess intended and unintended results of action from multiple perspectives, supported by relevant literature; and plan appropriate further research and action, and reflect critically on implications for teaching for social justice, demonstrating conceptual and pragmatic understandings. Rated master’s theses from the social studies program indicate that candidates identify a significant topic in social studies, successfully transform the topic into a research 19 question and thesis, and show adequate analysis and understanding of issues in social studies education.
The advanced program in social studies requires candidates to complete a curriculum unit at decision point 3. Data from this measure for the 2003-2004 academic year indicate 48 percent of the candidates took a highly developed and creative approach to knowledge of organizing principles of effective social studies curriculum and instruction, and 70 percent of candidates took a highly developed and creative approach to subject matter knowledge associated with New York State and National Council for Social Studies (NCSS) standards.
During interviews, candidates in the behavioral analysis program indicated that faculty and mentors require multiple measures to demonstrate candidates’ performance at all levels. The candidates indicated that they must perform at certain levels prior to moving from one level in the program to another. During interviews candidates indicated that the program was very demanding and rigorous. A candidate in the speech pathology program indicated that there was no “fluff” in the program, and a candidate in the behavior analysis program indicated that they feel as if they are really accomplishing something through their studies at Teachers College.
B. Content knowledge of other school personnel
The professional education unit prepares other school personnel through programs in education leadership and supervision, school counseling, and school psychology. Admission data for programs that prepare other school personnel indicate strong GPAs and high GRE scores. For the spring 2004 admissions review cycle, the average GPA is 3.34 and the average GRE scores are 589 (verbal) and 659 (quantitative).
Data on graduates of the education leadership and supervision program demonstrate strong performance as measured by PRAXIS II. Between 1999 and 2004 the range of scores was from 700-780 for graduates from Teachers College’s education leadership and supervision program. A passing score on this assessment is 620.
The admissions rubric for education leadership includes the three content components of scholarly potential, leadership potential, and education specific knowledge and experience. Data from the education leadership admission review rubric (Table 4) for spring 2004 indicate that candidates demonstrate content knowledge as evidenced by the percentage of candidates rating acceptable or excellent in scholarly potential (88%), leadership potential (85%) and education- specific knowledge and experience (54%).
Table 4. Education Leadership Admissions Review Summary Ratings Scholarly Leadership Education Specific Knowledge and Potential Potential Experience Unacceptable 0% 2% 0% Minimally acceptable 13% 13% 46% Acceptable 50% 52% 27% Excellent 38% 33% 27%
Candidates in the education leadership and supervision program demonstrate their knowledge of models and principles of organizational development and management; of strategic, long-range, and operational planning; and of fiscal, human, and material resource allocation to improve teaching and learning. Data collected from the 2003-2004 educational transformation project indicate that 70 percent of the candidates present minimal to moderate evidence of ability to
20 articulate a vision where minimal evidence is the acceptable level, 100 percent of the candidates present minimal to moderate evidence to steward a vision, 100 percent of the candidates present moderate evidence of providing effective instructional programs; and 70 percent of candidates meet or exceed standards for responding to the larger context.
Candidates who enter the school counseling program are evaluated based on their commitment to cultural diversity and social justice, previous work experience in educational and mental health settings, previous research experience, fit with the goals of the program, focus on their personal and career development and growth, ability to work collaboratively, self-awareness and insight, previous academic performance, relevant coursework, and emphasis on the scientist practitioner model of research informing practice and practice informing research. Analysis of data from the admissions rubric indicates that 97 percent of the admitted candidates are rated at the minimally acceptable and above level. As a part of their academic work, candidates are required to demonstrate their knowledge in case conceptualization; theoretical orientation; cultural diversity and identity (including race, gender, class, and sexual orientation); ethics; group work; professional issues; diagnosis; and career counseling and development.
Data collected on candidates in the school psychology program that demonstrate content knowledge includes demonstration of ability through GRE scores, undergraduate work, and a sample research paper. The mean GPA for the spring 2004 admission cycle was 3.48 and the mean GRE scores were 541 (verbal) and 618 (quantitative). Candidates are assessed on their competency in administration, scoring, and interpretation of a variety of tests. Data are collected from the internship evaluation forms where candidates are rated on a scale from 1 – needs improvement to 3 – above expectations. During the 2003-2004 academic year, data from internship evaluations indicate that candidates rated highest in the areas of intelligence testing (M=2.74), achievement testing (M=2.74), written reports (M=2.62), case presentation in conference (M=2.62), selection of appropriate assessment procedures (M=2.66), and practicality and appropriateness of recommendations (M=2.52).
Results of the graduate survey administered to school psychology graduates show that the majority of graduates believe that the program provided them with theoretical foundations in cognitive and developmental psychology. The mean score on the survey for the item “demonstrates a sound theoretical foundation in cognitive and developmental psychology as it applied to school-related learning” is 4.7 on a scale of 1 (very poor) to 5 (very good). The mean score on the item “demonstrates a sound theoretical foundation in cognitive and developmental psychology as it applied to mental health” is 3.8 using the same scale.
Between 1999 and 2003 the school psychology program surveyed 26 of its 29 graduates. The survey asked graduates to rate how well the program trained them in each area using a scale of 1 (very poor) to 5 (very good). Graduates indicate that the program prepared them to demonstrate a sound theoretical foundation in cognitive and developmental psychology as it applies to school- related learning (M=4.69), and mental health (M=3.88).
The overall quality of Teachers College graduates has also been documented in the ratings of U.S. News & World Report. In the 2005 Edition, Teachers College is rated number four of all teacher education programs by peers (deans, program directors, and senior faculty). Elementary Education and Curriculum and Instruction were ranked third in their respective areas. Teachers College is consistently at the top levels of these rankings.
21
C. Pedagogical content knowledge for teachers
Initial Program The units’ Master Domain of Learning Outcomes identifies areas in which the unit measures pedagogical content knowledge for initial and advanced programs. Outcome K3.2 – knowledge about learners and learning, and K3.3. – knowledge about curriculum and teaching.
The unit collects data on candidates’ ability to demonstrate knowledge of learners and learning including knowledge of human growth and development, behavior and motivation, cognition and learning theory, and leaner and learning characteristics as well as differences among learners. The unit also measures candidates’ knowledge of curriculum and teaching including knowledge of curriculum theory and resources, general pedagogical principles and teaching strategies, assessment and evaluation, language, and technology. Program strengths cited in reports by professional associations include significant theoretical issues of learning theory.
The unit assures candidate mastery of pedagogical content knowledge through data collected from reflective journals and papers, research papers/literature reviews, fieldwork/action research projects, curriculum planning projects (that include unit and lesson plans), and assessment and evaluation assignments.
In the social studies education program candidates create a professional development project for teachers at a hypothetical secondary school. Candidates are required to lay out the social justice/diversity problem, cite social studies literature in support of citizenship education that attends to social justice, and multiculturalism, and develop three workshops for social studies teachers with an emphasis on reflective inquiry as a hallmark of professionalism in teaching. Data from 2003-2004 indicate that 70 percent of candidates were rated as presenting an adequate and reflective approach to a highly developed and creative approach on the areas of collaboration among teachers as an integral part of the project; demonstrating reasoned and well supported evidence of commitment to social justice as a hallmark of social studies, and demonstrating growth in understanding of social studies as a contemporary field. Data from the same assessment indicate that 65 percent of candidates were rated at the level of presenting either an adequate and reflective approach, a highly developed and creative approach, or a well executed and intelligently conceived project.
Data from student teaching evaluations in the areas of knowledge about learners and learning and knowledge about curriculum and teaching indicate that 26 percent of the candidates were rated at acceptable or excellent and 71 percent were rated at minimally acceptable in their knowledge about learners and learning. On the same measure, university supervisors and cooperating teachers rate 68 percent of the candidates as acceptable or excellent and 29 percent rate of the candidates as minimally acceptable. These ratings reflect high expectations and standards on the part of the evaluators. Interviews with candidates indicate that they are assessed on their ability to demonstrate knowledge of their students and knowledge of pedagogical issues. One candidate indicated that the bilingual and bicultural program assessed candidates' ability to identify those things that are important in the classroom. She indicated that the program advocates being in the city and the idea of dual languages as a part of the program. She indicated that candidates receive instruction in the use of the dual model for bilingual education. Other candidates indicate that there is a focus on the connection with what is being taught and research on effective teaching.
Advanced Programs 22 Similar to initial programs, the advanced programs require candidates to demonstrate knowledge about learners and learning and knowledge about curriculum and teaching. Programs at the advanced level use assessment measures similar to the measures used at the initial levels. Program faculty expect candidates in advanced programs to demonstrate higher levels of proficiencies on measures such as reflective journals and papers, research papers/literature reviews, fieldwork/action research projects, curriculum planning projects (including unit and lesson plans), and assessment and evaluation assignments.
In the advanced program in physical education candidates are required to videotape themselves teaching a lesson and are to reflect on specific aspects of the lesson. Sample data from this assessment indicate that candidates plan lessons appropriate to the class and setting, provide detail for teacher candidates to complete the lesson in the setting, create lessons that are appropriate for students in class, and use assessment throughout the lesson.
The advanced secondary mathematics education program requires candidates to complete a unit plan and an observation project. Data from 2003-2004 indicate that 92 percent of the candidates provided evidence that they understand the major concepts and techniques in algebra, geometry analysis, and finite mathematics; understand the significance of mathematics as the language of the natural sciences and the contemporary social disciplines, and as a modeling instrument; are aware of different learning theories; demonstrate knowledge and understanding of developmental process of mathematical thinking; are aware of different learning styles and ways to address students’ needs; are aware of different approaches to curriculum development; use appropriate literature and resources; and evaluate and modify as appropriate commercial curriculum and materials.
Teacher candidates in the initial and advanced programs are required to demonstrate knowledge and use of technology in their academic coursework and during their student teaching. In fall 2003, the unit conducted the computing services survey (N=330). The results of the survey indicate that Teachers College candidates rated their computer skills at 2.52 on a five-point scale (1-expert through 5-novice). The survey also indicated that 56 percent of the candidates reported that they used presentation technology in the classroom (M=3.02) on a scale from 5 – always through 1 – rarely.
D. Professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills for teachers
Initial Program Candidates in initial programs participate in a variety of courses and field experiences that focus on pedagogical and professional knowledge including the study of school and classroom cultures, curriculum, classroom management, social and cultural problems, and communities and families and technology. Evidence of candidate performance on professional and pedagogical knowledge and skill outcomes is demonstrated through the following major assessments that include fieldwork/action research project; curriculum planning projects; and assessment and evaluation assignments.
The results of student teaching evaluations as documented in Table 5 indicates that between 88 percent and 98 percent of candidates meet the standard and as many as 10 percent of candidates are reported to exceed the standard in the area of assessment.
Table 5: Student Teaching Evaluation Summary, 2004 Knowledge, Skills and Dispositions Doesn’t meet Meets standard Exceeds standard standard 23 Knowledge, Skills and Dispositions Doesn’t meet Meets standard Exceeds standard standard Self-critique and reflection 1% 92% 7% Planning of curriculum 2% 91% 7% Instruction 1% 94% 5% Assessment 2% 88% 10% Learners and learning 3% 94% 3% Curriculum and teaching 3% 93% 4% Growth and development of all students 1% 98% 1%
Candidates applying for a teaching certificate are required to achieve passing scores on the elementary and secondary version of the Assessment of Teaching Skills – Written (ATS-W). The elementary ATS-W measures professional and pedagogical knowledge at the early childhood (birth through grade 2) and childhood (grades 1-6) levels. The secondary ATS-W measures professional and pedagogical knowledge at middle childhood (grades 5-9) and adolescence (grades 7-12) levels. Data from the ATS-W over the past three years indicate that Teachers College has a higher percent rate of candidates passing than the state pass rate (Table 6).
Table 6. Candidates’ Performance on ATS-W Year N Tested TC % Passed State % Passed 2004 413 100% - 2003 338 99% 96% 2002 360 99% 96%
Advanced Program Advanced programs use similar measures of candidate performance of pedagogical content knowledge. Programs at the advanced level assess candidates on school and classroom cultures, curriculum, classroom management, social and cultural problems, communities and families, and technology. These skill areas are assessed through fieldwork/action research projects; curriculum planning projects; and assessment and evaluation assignments.
The advanced programs in learning dis/abilities collect data through a series of assessments at levels 2 and 3. Data collected in 2003-2004 indicate that 66 percent of candidates score from proficient to extraordinary on the cooperating or mentor teacher assessment of student teaching (internship) and on the supervisor assessment of student teaching (internship). Fifty-five percent of the candidates scored from proficient to extraordinary on the technology assignment and the final lesson plan. On the same instrument 45 percent of the candidates score from proficient to extraordinary on the collaboration assignment and inclusion in action research project.
E. Professional knowledge and skills for other school personnel
Candidates in the education leadership program use a case study method to describe and propose a solution for an educational transformation strategy to improve student achievement in one of five urban districts undergoing reform. Results of data from the 2003-2004 data try-outs for the educational transformation project indicate that 70 percent of candidates provide moderate evidence that they promote community involvement in the vision. Sample data from the dissertation rubric indicate candidates apply an understanding of the larger political, social, economic, legal, and cultural contexts to develop activities and policies to transform an aspect of school or district to improve student achievement.
Faculty members in the school counseling program use the results of a comprehensive exam, the counseling skill evaluation, the school counseling final project and the racial cultural lab
24 evaluation to assess candidates’ professional knowledge. The counseling skills evaluation rubric measures candidates’ awareness of their own as well as their client’s cultural identity (in terms of gender, class, race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation) as it impacts the counseling relationship and process. Aggregated data from 2003-2004 on the counseling skills evaluation indicate that 60 percent of the candidates rated from acceptable to excellent in the areas of self-critique and reflection, issues of professional concern, and use of strategies to address inequalities in the classroom, school, and society.
Data collected from the fieldwork evaluation in the school psychology program indicate that candidates demonstrate professional knowledge and skills. Data from the fieldwork evaluation summary indicate candidates are above average or extremely skillful in the areas of interviewing skills (M=4.89 on a scale where 1 is extremely inadequate and 5 is extremely skillful), interpretation of psychological tests and assessment data (M=4.89), counseling skills (M=4.53), consultation skills (M=4.64), ability to re-assess progress and develop a new intervention plan (M=4.60), responsiveness to supervision (M=4.87), responsible work habits (M=4.60), and conducting oneself in an ethical manner (M=5.00).
Graduates of the school psychology program indicate that the program prepared them to implement and evaluate theoretically and empirically sound educational interventions for school personnel (M=4.08), families (3.81), and children (M=3.81). Respondents also indicate that the program prepared them to implement and evaluate behavioral consultation with school personnel and parents about children’s instruction and learning (M=4.27), mental health (M=3.50), and behavior (M=3.85).
F. Dispositions
Initial Programs The conceptual framework outlines the dispositions measured by the six broadly defined dispositions of open mindedness and commitment to inquiry and reflection; commitment to profession, ethics, and lifelong learning; community leadership, commitment to the fullest possible growth and development of all students; willingness to collaborate; and respect for diversity and commitment to social justice.
Data from the admissions rubric indicate that candidates in the initial program provide evidence of the dispositions identified by the unit. The percentage of candidates ranges from 99 percent to 91 percent that were related minimally acceptable to excellent (Table 7).
Table 7. Admissions Review Summary Ratings Career Goals and Attitudes toward Experience Working Commitment to Diverse Populations with Children and Profession Youth Unacceptable 1% 9% 5% Minimally acceptable 14% 26% 14% Acceptable 61% 41% 68% Excellent 25% 24% 13%
Each program assesses dispositions for candidates at each decision point. Assessments of dispositions are contained within courses across the programs as well as in key assessments as a part of program assessment maps. At the admissions decision point, dispositions are measured through the admissions rubric. Data from the admissions rubric for spring 2004 indicate that 99
25 percent of the candidates rated minimally acceptable to excellent in the area of career goals and commitment to the profession; 91 percent of the candidates rated minimally acceptable to excellent in the area of attitudes toward diverse populations; and 95 percent of candidates rated minimally acceptable to excellent in the area of experience working with children and youth.
Within major assessments in some programs, dispositions are measured through a variety of assignments. Assessments of dispositions across programs include measures in portfolios, final projects and reflection essays. In the mathematics education program candidates are required to complete an observation journal and a unit plan evaluation. Data from 2003-2004 indicate that 73 percent of candidates provide adequate evidence in understanding to strong/consistent evidence in understanding of being sensitive to individual, cultural, religious, and racial differences; striving to contribute to bridging the achievement gap in mathematics; respecting the diversity in their classroom; and believing in the role of schooling in attaining equity.
The unit aggregated field experience data across six programs for 85 student teachers for spring 2004. Between 88 percent and 98 percent of the candidates meet standards on field experience evaluations on disposition measures. Eleven percent of candidates were reported to exceed standards for communication and collaboration and willingness to collaborate, and another 10 percent of candidates exceeds the standard for strategies to address inequalities.
Table 8. Field Experience Evaluations Measuring Dispositions Knowledge, Skills and Dispositions Doesn’t meet Meets standard Exceeds standard standard Self-critique and reflection 1% 92% 7% Communication and collaboration 0% 89% 11% Strategies to address inequalities 3% 87% 10% Issues of professional concern 1% 95% 4% Effective collaboration 0% 95% 5% Commitment to inquiry and reflection 4% 89% 7% Growth and development of all students 1% 98% 1% Willingness to collaborate 1% 88% 11%
Advanced Programs Candidates in advanced programs are assessed on disposition-related measures at all decision points on measures similar to initial programs. Reported data for most performance assessments are shared between some initial and advanced programs. However, other programs provide extended opportunities for candidates to demonstrate identified dispositions. For instance, the advanced program in social studies requires candidates to complete a master’s thesis that reflects the candidate has identified a question that has relevance to social justice, and through the thesis shows adequate analysis and understanding of issues in social studies education.
Data from the admissions rubric indicate that candidates in the advanced programs provide evidence of the dispositions identified by the unit. The percentage of candidates ranges from 99 percent to 93 percent that were related minimally acceptable to excellent (Table 9).
Table 9. Admissions Review Summary for Advanced Programs Ratings Career Goals and Attitudes toward Experience Working Commitment to Diverse Populations with Children and Youth Profession Unacceptable 1% 8% 0% Minimally acceptable 8% 24% 12% Acceptable 55% 32% 56% Excellent 36% 37% 31% 26
Interviews with advanced candidates indicate that their programs emphasize their ability to meet the needs of students in a multicultural environment. It was expressed that the theme of diversity is prevalent throughout programs, and current theories and practices around the diverse needs are emphasized.
G. Student learning for teacher candidates
Initial programs Candidates in initial programs are assessed on their knowledge of learners, their ability to plan instruction and assess student learning, and their ability to create an effective learning environment. Data from the New York State Teacher Certification Examination (NYSTCE) Assessment of Teaching Skills (ATS) test for the 2004 Teachers College graduates indicate candidates demonstrate their ability to impact student learning. The New York System cut score for the ATS is 220. Teachers College graduates results were well above the state cut score on knowledge of the learner (M=272), instructional planning and assessment (M=272), instructional delivery (M=265), and professional environment (M=267).
Candidates are assessed on their abilities to impact student learning through reflective journals and papers, fieldwork/action research projects, curriculum planning projects, and assessment projects. Evaluations of lesson and unit plans demonstrate how candidates (a) plan instruction appropriately for diverse groups of students (b) alter instruction based on student results, and (c) adapt instruction to accommodate individual differences
Some of the initial programs collect data on candidates’ abilities to assess student learning for a single child while other programs collect data on candidates’ abilities to assess the learning of groups of children. Special education programs require candidates to demonstrate their ability to adjust instruction and interventions that have been made as a result of the analysis of outcome data collected on individual students.
During interviews candidates from several initial programs provided specific examples of how their programs assessed their ability to impact student learning. A candidate reported that in the American Sign Language (ASL) program she completed a linguistic project that required her to assess a students’ ability prior to teaching a lesson and to modify her instruction to address the students’ need based on that student’s performance level. The candidate reported that she was able to identify where her student was and the best way to serve the child. A candidate in the Deaf Education program reported that she was constantly doing observations and using inquiry to meet the needs of students. She reported that she was required to do language samples and look at the abilities of students who are deaf and hard of hearing as well as hearing students to make decisions about appropriate instructional strategies.
In the general curriculum class candidates report engaging in projects that demonstrate their understanding of the fact that there all types of students and that there were many ways of meeting their needs. A candidate reported that she was required to do a socio-cultural project where she taught a mini-lesson and took notes on how the strategies that are being used affect students. As a part of the project she took a holistic approach to teaching students. She reported constantly looking at strategies and modifying what she was doing in order to meet the needs of the students. A candidate from the bilingual/bicultural program reported completing projects where she sits with individual children to gather information about their developmental levels as well as to learn about their families and their communities. During interviews candidates also 27 reported examining existing student assessments such as previous work and portfolios and work with student assessments to see how students are progressing and developing. TESOL candidates also conduct miscue analysis in order to determine how students are reacting to oral literacy. Candidates examine child portfolios for language and literacy in the early childhood education program. It was reported that candidates in advanced practicum develop their own inquiry and research projects around student learning.
Advanced Programs Candidates in advanced programs document student learning outcomes through the same measures as candidates in initial programs. Teachers College rubrics are designed along a continuum that differentiates between the knowledge, skills, and dispositions of beginning teachers (candidates in initial programs) and experienced teachers (candidates in advanced programs).
Candidates in the curriculum and teaching complete a practicum evaluation project. As a part of that project they document three formal and information assessment strategies used before, during, and after instruction to promote the development of the whole child. Additionally, they are required to assess samples of students' work. Data from the practicum evaluation project indicate that 55 percent of all program candidates (100 percent of assessed candidates) rate at the meets expectations or at the target levels.
The advanced program in physical education requires candidates to complete a videotape self- analysis. Data from 2004 indicate that 100 percent (N=10) of the candidates were rated at the target level on questions for small group assessment are clearly tied to lesson and shows thought, as well as analysis of group discussion is reflective and points towards appropriate areas. Interviews with candidates in the advanced programs provide evidence that candidates are required to examine their practice through inquiry projects that document their ability to use the research methodology to analyze student learning outcomes.
H. Student learning for other school personnel
Programs for other school personnel measure candidates' ability to create positive environments for student learning, to demonstrate their understanding of and building upon the developmental level of students, to view diversity as a strength, and to promote social justice. Candidates in the education leadership program analyze school or district problems and issues, develop research- grounded strategies, and propose solutions and recommendations.
Candidates in the education leadership and supervision program are assessed on their ability to develop, articulate, and steward a vision that promotes success of all students. Candidates demonstrate their understanding of the larger political, social, economic, legal, and cultural contexts to develop activities and policies to transform an aspect of school or district to improve student achievement, and data management in transforming learning for all students, through the educational transformative project. Data from spring 2004 indicates that all candidates (N=10) provided evidence that they provide effective instructional programs. Results of the field-based work projects in the program indicate that candidates score between proficient and accomplished in the areas of developing the vision, communicating the vision, implementing a vision, and monitoring and evaluating the vision.
Candidates in the school psychology program are assessed on their ability to promote the cognitive, behavioral, and social growth and development of children and families from diverse linguistic, cultural, and racial backgrounds. Data are collected on candidates’ ability to assess 28 and diagnose students’ learning, behavior, and emotional problems and strengths; generate recommendations that are developmentally appropriate, that remediate deficits effectively, and that promote competence; implement and evaluate theoretically, and empirically sound educational and mental health intervention programs for school personnel, families, and children; and implement and evaluate behavioral consultation with school personnel and parents about students’ instruction and learning, mental health, and behavior. Data are collected using the psycho educational assessment in the areas of conducting an assessment of a client and submitting weekly client meeting anecdotal summaries, administering one extensive test description outline and critique for one assigned measure, developing a written report of testing results, and presenting a case conference. Information from internship evaluations indicate that candidates rate between meets expectations and above expectations when rated on ability to conduct effective needs assessment (M=2.50); provide appropriate interventions in classrooms (M=2.29); design psycho- educational programs (M=2.43); and implement psycho-educational programs (M=2.29).
In the 2004 survey conducted by the school psychology program graduates were asked to rate how well the program trained them to develop skills to support student learning using a scale of 1 (very poor) to 5 (very good). Respondents indicate that the program prepared them to assess and diagnose learning (M=4.85), behavior (M=4.04), and social/emotional functioning (M=3.85).
Candidates in the school counseling program are assessed on their understanding of the organization, administration, and program evaluation of comprehensive guidance programs within schools settings. Candidates demonstrate their understanding and applications of principles of human development to the cognitive and affective growth of children and adolescents through field work evaluations. Candidates are rated from 1 – excellent to 5 poor on the areas of establishing rapport with clients, counseling individual clients about personal and/or social concerns, counseling individual clients about educational and/or career plans, working with school-level articulation (i.e. college advising, high school choice); maintaining appropriate relationships with clients/students/patients; capably managing emergency situations with clients; confronting self-destructive client beliefs; utilizing silence with clients; helping clients set attainable goals; listening to others non-judgmentally; communicating respect, acceptance and unconditional positive regard toward clients/students/patients; and obtaining client history and background information. Data from the 2003-2004 counseling skills evaluation indicate that 60 percent of candidates were rated as acceptable to excellent.
Overall Assessment of Standard
Assessment data from the New York State Teacher Certification Examinations as well as admission data from initial and advanced programs indicate that candidates have knowledge, skills, and dispositions to meet professional, state, and institutional standards. Additionally, performance data from field experiences, case studies, curriculum projects, integrated units, theses and comprehensive examinations provide evidence that teacher education candidates demonstrate competencies identified by the professional education unit. Assessment data from candidates in programs for other school personnel, including admission data, comprehensive examinations, field evaluations, special projects, and case studies, document that the programs are ensuring candidate competence to support student learning. The unit’s programs are reviewed by the state of New York, special accrediting associations and specialized professional associations (SPAs). However, some programs have not been nationally recognized.
Recommendation: MET 29
Areas for Improvement:
New Not all programs have met all of the standards of their respective specialized professional associations.
Rationale: The elementary education, social studies and science education programs have not received national recognition.
30 STANDARD 2. ASSESSMENT SYSTEM AND UNIT EVALUATION
The unit has an assessment system that collects and analyzes data on the applicant qualifications, the candidate and graduate performance, and unit operations to evaluate and improve the unit and its programs.
Level: Initial and advanced
A. Assessment system
The unit’s Subcommittee of the Teachers College Accreditation Team (TCAT) coordinated the development of the unit assessment system. The Assessment subcommittee included: TCAT faculty leader and department chair; TCAT project coordinator; assessment consultant and faculty member in evaluation and measurement; associate dean for teacher education; faculty member and program coordinator; directors of the Offices of Field Support Services, Institutional Studies, Information Technology, Academic Computing, and Administrative Information Services; a master’s candidate; and a doctoral candidate who is an elementary school teacher. Table 11 shows the assessment system and its link to the conceptual framework. The context variables (A) and the input and process variables (B) depict traditional components of an assessment system. The outcomes (C) show the way that Teachers College standards and candidate proficiencies in knowledge, skills and dispositions, provide data for program and unit decisions. The use of the data (D) allows the unit to improve.
Table 10 shows internal and external data sources that were previously generated by Teachers College with data from new outcome-based candidate assessments.
Table 10. Sources of Evidence on Candidates, Graduates, Faculty, and Institution
Evidence on: Internal Data Sources External Data Sources Candidate Outcome-based candidate assessments Undergraduate GPA Performance Admissions data (e.g., number of applicants, GRE scores number of admits, demographics, feeder State Certification Exams (LAST, CST, schools, etc.) ATS, PRAXIS, etc.) Enrollment data Retention data Graduation data Course grade distributions Graduate Graduation rates Graduate survey Quality Exit survey of candidates State Certification Exams (LAST, CST, ATS, PRAXIS, etc.)
Program Course evaluations by candidates Rankings by peer institutions Quality Student satisfaction survey Graduate survey Exit survey of candidates SPA and State Reviews Program self-reviews Faculty Faculty qualifications (Banner & CVs) Graduate survey Qualifications Course evaluations by candidates Professional recognitions and Exit survey of candidates Publications and professional presentations Productivity Reappointment, promotion, and tenure reviews Service and impact of work Unit Faculty/student ratios Resource Facilities inventory Allocations Library and technology resources And Supports Financial data/Annual budget
31 Table 11: Teachers College Assessment System: Conceptual and Design Framework
A. Context Variables B. Input and Process Variables C. Outcomes
Entering Candidate Teachers College (Unit) Characteristics Teachers College (Unit) Outcomes INPUTS: D. Use of Data - Faculty from Multiple Aggregated evidence on: - Administrative Supports Sources for Teachers College - Resources Quality (Unit) Assurance and - TC Standards* - Mission, Stances, Characteristics: Improvement - KSD Indicators Standards* Institutional History, Quality, National - Formative decision-making Standing, Governance Program Level Outcomes - Summative decision-making Aggregated evidence PROGRAM PROCESSES State and National on: Curriculum - TC Standards* (plus Field and Other Requirements, - KSD Indicators including Experiences) Accreditation
Needs Instruction Assessment
Societal and Community Needs and Influences Individual Candidate Proficiencies and Outcomes - Clients (state, national, international) Evidence on : - Stakeholders - TC Standards - KSD Indicators*
32 During a September 2003 assessment workshop, a Master Domain of Learning Outcomes was shared with faculty by the Assessment Subcommittee. Since each program, initial and advanced, used the Master Domain to align core courses and major assessments in an assessment map, all program assessments are linked to candidate proficiencies and Teacher College standards identified in the conceptual framework.
Table 12. Master Domain of Learning Outcomes Stance: TC Standard 1. Knowledge INQUIRY Inquirers and K1.1 Research and Inquiry Methods Reflective Practitioners K1.2 Relationship between Research and Practice Skills S1.1 Self-critique and Reflection S1.2 Application of Research to Practice S1.3 Use of Research and Inquiry Methods in Practice Dispositions D1.1 Open-mindedness and Commitment to Inquiry and Reflection Stance: TC Standard 2. Knowledge INQUIRY Responsible and K2.1 Continuum of Lifelong Learning Lifelong Learners K2.2 Issues of Professional Concern Skills S2.1 Planning, Implementation, and Evaluation of Professional Growth Dispositions D2.1 Commitment to the Profession, Ethics, and Lifelong Learning D2.2 Commitment to Leadership Stance: TC Standard 3. Knowledge CURRICULUM Learner-Centered K3.1 Subject-Matter or Disciplinary Knowledge Educators/Professionals K3.2 Knowledge about Learners and Learning K3.3 Knowledge about Curriculum and Teaching Skills S3.1 Planning of Curriculum and/or Services S3.2 Implementation of Instruction and/or Services S3.3 Social Behavior Management/Classroom Management S3.4 Assessment and Evaluation Dispositions D3.1 Commitment to the Fullest Possible Growth and Development of All Students
Stance: TC Standard 4. Knowledge SOCIAL Effective Collaborators K4.1 Processes and Strategies of Effective Cooperation and JUSTICE Collaboration Skills S4.1 Interaction and Collaboration Dispositions D4.1 Willingness to Collaborate Stance: TC Standard 5. Knowledge SOCIAL Advocates of Social Justice K5.1 Democracy, Equity, and Schooling JUSTICE and Diversity Skills S5.1 Use of Strategies to Address Inequalities in the Classroom, School, and Society Dispositions D5.1 Respect for Diversity and Commitment to Social Justice
33
A second assessment workshop held in March 2004 provided faculty with a data collection manual to enable faculty to pilot the assessments and rubrics at various decision points.
Program faculty shared the assessment tasks and assessment rubrics with PK-12 practitioners including cooperating teachers and faculty involved with candidates in action research projects. Syllabi include the assessment tasks and related rubrics. In some programs, as a result of the assessment pilot, rubrics have been revised.
In order to have data from each program that would assess candidate performance and be used for program and unit evaluation, the unit assessment system established common decision points: admissions, academic coursework, clinical practice, and program completion. For the majority of programs, six major program assessments are linked to each decision point (one at admissions, two during coursework, two during clinical practice, and one at program completion) and a common three- or four-point rubric is used across programs. The four-point rubric (1: does not meet expectations, 2: barely meets expectations, 3: meets expectations, and 4: exceeds expectations) enables the unit to aggregate data. Although each program may use more than six assessments to evaluate candidates, only the six assessments identified by the program as the major assessments will be aggregated with other programs' assessments to provide unit-level data.
While the unit assessment system identifies the decision points, the number of assessments, and the rubric scale, the specific programs develop assessments and the rubric guides that are appropriate to the program standards. Program assessment maps for each program identify the Teachers College standards, New York State standards, and major assessments at each decision point. The assessments link to the knowledge, skills and dispositions identified as candidate performances for each standard. Programs for the initial preparation of teachers and advanced programs for the preparation of other school personnel follow the six assessments and four decision point design. The mathematics assessment map illustrates the four decision point design. (See Table 13.)
Advanced programs for the continuing preparation of teachers also develop assessment maps that link assessments to Teachers College standards and candidate performances; however, they have three decision points and fewer total assessments. The curriculum and teaching assessment map shows the assessment design for that program. (See Table 14.)
34 Table 13. Mathematics Education Map of Major Assessments
TC Standards St1: Inquirers and Reflective St2: Lifelong Learners St3: Learner-centered St4: Effective St5: Advocates Practitioners Educators/Professionals Collaborators for Social Justice NYS Standards Pedagogical Core (vii) Pedagogical Core (ix) General Education and Content Core Pedagogical Core Pedagogical Core § 52.21 Pedagogical Core (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) (iii) (viii) (viii) (x) (xi) (xiii) Major Assessments
.3 S3.3 S3.4 D3.1 K1.1 K1.2 S1.1 S1.2 S1 D1.1 K2.1 K2.2 S2.1 D2.1 D2.2 K3.1 K3.2 K3.3 S3.1 S3.2 K4.1 S4.1 D4.1 K5.1 S5.1 D5.1 Entry (DP1) Admissions x x x x x x x x x x x Review Pre-clinical (DP2) Content Exams x x x x x x x x x x X x x Reflective x x x x x x x x x x x x x X x x x x x x x x Papers Unit Plan x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X x x x x x x x x x x Project Clinical (DP3) Student x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X x x x x x x x x x x Teaching Evaluation Supervisor’s x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X x x x x x x x x x x Evaluation Exit (DP4) Final Project x x x x x x x x x x x x x X x x x x x x x x
35 Table 14. Curriculum and Teaching Major Assessments/Standards Map
Major Assessments St1: Inquirers and Reflective St2: Lifelong Learners St3: Learner-centered St4: Effective St5: Advocates (Decision Points) Practitioners Educators/Professionals Collaborators for Social Justice NYS Standards § Pedagogical Core (vii) Pedagogical Core (ix) General Education and Content Core Pedagogical Pedagogical 52.21 Pedagogical Core (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) Core (iii) (viii) Core (viii) (x) (vii) (xi) (xiii)
TC Standards K1.1 K1.2 S1.1 S1.2 S1.3 D1.1 K2.1 K2.2 S2.1 D2.1 D2.2 K3.1 K3.2 K3.3 S3.1 S3.2 S3.3 S3.4 D3.1 K4.1 S4.1 D4.1 K5.1 S5.1 D5.1
Entry
Admissions Review X X X X X X X Midpoint Practicum X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Evaluation Curriculum X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Framework Exit Masters Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Research Project
36 Not all assessments have been administered in all programs at this time. Admissions rubrics for decision point 1 and some assessments at decision point 2 have been administered in the majority of programs. Two reports have been prepared for the TCAT office by the assessment consultant, one showing the performance of teacher education candidates at decision point 1 for initial programs and one showing the performance of teacher education candidates at decision point 1 for advanced programs. Each report aggregates program data to show unit-level decisions on admission in both table and chart form. For example, 35 percent of applicants to initial programs were denied admission, 62 percent were admitted, and three percent are pending decision. Additional tables and charts show the percentage of initial candidates at each of the four points on the unit rubric for each candidate proficiency. In addition to sharing program data with program faculty, these data also were shared with the TEPC since it serves as the unit’s educator preparation policy committee.
Each program identified both formative and summative assessments. The TCAT Accreditation Team selected LiveText for the creation of an E-portfolio. The portfolio template is based on Teachers College standards. Each candidate in the six pilot programs placed assessments in the portfolio. In some cases the candidate performances had been assessed in a formative way prior to placement in the portfolio. At program completion changes to individual assessments that had been made by candidates were assessed in the E-portfolio at a summative level. One program used the E-portfolio as a vehicle for candidates to reflect on their assessments relative to the Teachers College standards. The E-portfolio management system allows each program director to review candidate scores across all E-portfolios. The faculty discussed the difference between using the LiveText E-portfolio template structure to guide the submission of portfolio pieces so that candidates can reflect, rather than on the more open design on a web that may move the candidate’s focus from reflection to web development issues. Since Teachers College uses Classweb, discussion is taking place to see if Classweb might be used for portfolio submission.
Data from pilot assessments were analyzed to examine issues of validity and reliability. Content- based validity and convergent validity were determined in a study conducted by the assessment consultant. Assessments were developed first for use in courses, then for use by programs, and finally for use by the unit. A first review in establishing content-based validity involved obtaining expert reviews followed by the revision of all assessments and rubrics by faculty members within programs. The consultant recommends that programs obtain external reviews of assessments and rubrics. The external reviewers will also be asked to provide an external validation that the dimensions of current rubrics are aligned to Teacher College standards and the identified candidate proficiencies at the knowledge, skills, and dispositions level. Data gathered on convergent validity were studied to determine the correlation between the developed assessments and other indicators such as grade point averages or GRE scores.
Reliability analyses were performed by the assessment consultant on all candidate assessments that were rated by two or more faculty members, with positive results on inter-rater reliability on the program level at decision point 1. Reports were prepared that present data on inter-rater reliability and convergent validity. The analysis indicates further refinement of the assessment tasks and/or rubrics may be needed within programs to strengthen the measure of candidate performance.
37 Since the convergent validity studies show that the rubrics are not yet distinguishing candidate performance on all assessments, the assessment consultant recommends that revisions to the rubrics and assessments be completed and further data collected before analysis of the assessments as predictors of candidate success can be conducted.
B. Data collection, analysis, and evaluation
Table 15 shows the unit’s schedule for collecting data used in the assessment system.
Table 15. Assessment System by Category and Frequency Cycle Type of Data Frequency of Collected from Whom Collection
Candidates Admissions Data (Diversity, GPA, GRE, etc.) Each semester Admissions (BANNER) Admissions Review for KSDs Each semester Programs Grade distribution during academic coursework Each semester Institutional Studies Performance on major assessments and KSDs Each semester Programs Performance during clinical practice on KSDs Each semester Programs, cooperating practitioners Completion of clock hours of clinical practice Each semester Programs, Field Support Services Performance on integrative project/dissertation on KSDs Each semester Programs Candidate enrollment and retention data Annually Institutional Studies Data on degrees awarded and completion of programs Annually Institutional Studies State and certification exams Annually New York State Follow up survey of graduates and employers Every two years Institutional Studies Programs Review of program curricula and assessments Annually Programs Course evaluations Each semester Institutional Studies Evaluation of clinical experiences Each semester Programs, Field Support Services Student satisfaction survey Each semester Institutional Studies Exit and graduate survey Annually Institutional Studies SPA and State reviews As specified SPAs, NYS DOE Faculty Course evaluations Each semester Institutional Studies Student satisfaction survey Each semester Institutional Studies Exit and graduate survey Each semester Institutional Studies Initial appointment/review of qualifications As required Search committees, Dean’s office Department chair review Annually Department chairs Reappointment/promotion/tenure reviews As required Special review committees, Dean Curricula vitae review and update Every two years Dean’s office Supervisor survey Annually Field Support Services Cooperating practitioner survey Annually Field Support Services Resources Faculty workload, faculty/student ratios Annually Institutional Studies Facilities inventory As needed Facilities Office Library resources As needed Library Technology resources Every two years Computer Information Systems Financial data/budget Annually Budget Office Policies and Goals Review of conceptual framework Annually TEPC Review of program assessment plans and data Annually Programs Review of unit assessment plan and data Annually TEPC, Dean
38
Teachers College Candidate Assessment Tracker (TCAT) is a web application designed to track the assessment of candidates applying to any program and/or currently attending Teachers College. Its development followed the unit’s experience with the E-portfolio designed on LiveText. The web application, designed in May 2004 and revised in October 2004, is a database with major tabs for data on candidates, assessments, rubrics, and standards. The program also allows for the generation of reports and has help and administrative options. The TCAT office provided specific program reports to program faculty in early 2005. Each report provides the program assessment map, the Master Domain of Learning Outcomes, and specific assessment descriptions. These descriptions link to Teachers College standards, the assessment system decision point, and the criteria and/or rubric used for evaluation. Data on each assessment are provided in spreadsheet, summary, and graph format. A data feedback questionnaire provides program faculty with the opportunity to critique the report and to indicate whether the information provided is helpful and whether any changes to the report are recommended.
The student handbook outlines procedures that candidates follow for grade corrections and other forms of appeals. The first step in the process is a direct discussion between the candidate and the instructor. If necessary, the next step would be a candidate appeal to the department chairperson of the department offering the course with a final appeal to the associate dean for academic affairs. A student ombudsperson is available to facilitate the discussions if needed.
C. Use of data for program improvement
The unit is currently creating an Office of Assessment and Accreditation that will provide unit coordination on issues of accreditation and assessment. The office will coordinate preparation for special accreditation reviews across the unit, Middle States accreditation, and ongoing support for the assessment system developed in response to the NCATE review. Currently the unit assessment system, data collection, and program improvements are accomplished through the TEPC and the TCAT as well as at the program level. The extensive process of developing and refining the unit assessment system lead to the need for creating this Office of Assessment and Accreditation that will provide oversight to the assessment system.
Data for program improvement are used in a variety of ways. In education leadership, the faculty looks at candidate work to determine how courses should be revised and how changes needed in courses could influence hiring decisions in the department.
Based on candidate work in internships, the education leadership internship design has been strengthened and expectations clarified to require three major work projects that apply theoretical frameworks to solve problems. During a discussion with education leadership faculty the following comments were made: “Writing rubrics is hard, rubrics are a live document and must be constantly revised. It enables faculty to be more specific about performance criteria for candidates. The process of developing rubrics was useful, now the question of collecting data – what do we do with it.”
Program faculty use data from various sources to make appropriate changes. In discussion with faculty an example was given of the use of data provided by rubrics used to evaluate master’s
39 projects. Since very accomplished candidates did not score as highly on the rubric as the faculty member expected, further analysis of the course and the professor’s teaching of that course led her to make changes in the course design.
Overall Assessment of Standard
The unit has developed a comprehensive unit assessment system. Through the use of assessment maps all programs have an assessment system aligned with the conceptual framework and state standards. The unit has collected and analyzed pilot data and is changing its organizational structure to create an office that will continue support for the assessment system.
The structure of the assessment system, the comprehensive analysis of pilot data including validity and reliability studies, the development of assessment maps and subsequent tasks and rubrics at the program level, and the unit’s development of a database are exemplary.
Recommendation: Met
Areas for Improvement: None
40 STANDARD 3. FIELD EXPERIENCES AND CLINICAL PRACTICE
The unit and its school partners design, implement, and evaluate field experiences and clinical practice so that teacher candidates and other school personnel develop and demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn.
A. Collaboration between unit and school partners
Teachers College is a graduate school with integrated academic studies, field experiences, and clinical practice. Field experiences and clinical practice are essential program components for the initial and advanced preparation of teacher candidates and candidates for other school roles at Teachers College. Teacher education candidates are required to enroll in fieldwork and clinical practice in the first or second semester of their studies. The inquiry stance of the conceptual framework requires teacher candidates and candidates for other school roles to study and question the relationship between practical experiences and knowledge derived from research and theories.
The process of designing, delivering, and evaluating field experiences and clinical practice is an ongoing endeavor that requires active collaboration between program faculty, instructors, cooperating practitioners, and supervisors. Opportunities to communicate, reflect, problem solve and evaluate candidates’ progress are evident in follow-up interviews with supervisors, cooperating practitioners, program faculty, and instructors.
Faculty members in the professional education programs are directly responsible for the design, implementation, and evaluation of field and clinical experiences. Incorporated into learning opportunities are the latest research and developments in their fields. Professional standards and state regulations are adhered to and to ensure high quality of field experiences and clinical practice. The professional education faculty collaborate with college and school-based clinical faculty through program meetings, school site/supervisor meetings, supervisor meetings, and cooperating practitioners’ orientations.
Since the institution has had a longstanding partnership with the Holmes Group, the institution has established professional development school (PDS) partnerships with local schools. Teachers College collaborates with schools and currently has four PDS sites located in Manhattan, near Teachers College. The partnership schools include: PS 165, PS 87, and Beacon High School. The PDS schools work in collaboration with Teachers College, Region 10 in Manhattan and the United Federation of Teachers (UFT).
One purpose of the PDS partnership is to reinvent the traditional school-university relationship in order to enhance the professional development of future teachers, experienced teachers, and college faculty working in urban schools. Several teacher education programs at Teachers College participate in this collaborative effort.
The purpose of the PDS charter is to provide the partnership with a framework that articulates the Teachers College vision and delineates institutional and individual responsibility and accountability. This charter is fluid and subject to reflection and revision because it is intended to
41 be responsive to the growing, evolving nature of collaboration. It will support the work of current participants and lay the groundwork for future work. The PDS Charter states: “We believe that all children can learn and that children—and the teaching of those children—are valuable and worthy of full commitment on the part of teachers, teacher educators, and administrators. We are committed to promoting urban schools and universities as inclusive communities of life-long learners.”
PDS work is supported and defined by the following four cornerstones: 1. Shared responsibility for the development of pre-service and beginning teachers 2. The continuing development of experienced teachers and teacher educators 3. The creation of communities of sustained inquiry 4. The research and development of the teaching profession and school reform
The professional development of future teachers, experienced teachers, and college faculty working in urban schools is at the center of the partnership’s activities. Candidates engage in action research projects which develop into school staff development. The institutional commitment in the PDS partnership supports placement of student teachers and interns. Priority is given to placing student teachers first in the PDS collaborating schools, when appropriate placements are available. School partners are committed to supporting the placement of student teachers and interns by working to have multiple appropriate placements at each site and by developing opportunities for student teachers to work with a cohort of teachers. Teacher education programs such as bilingual education, elementary education, teaching of social studies, early childhood, and technology specialists place their student teachers and interns in PDS schools. Many of the student teachers/interns are hired by the PDS schools after graduation. Advisory boards and committees are established by programs such as deaf and hard of hearing and education leadership to share information about current trends, needs, issues, and developments in the field to enhance the programs' quality and relevance.
Specific programs may have established school partnerships. The program in science education works with several schools in the Bronx and on the upper west side of Manhattan. The program offers a set of courses with a concentration in urban science education, and it collaborates with schools and community-based organizations to provide program candidates with the opportunity to apply what they learn to real-life educational problems. The school psychology program collaborates with three Catholic schools that serve as site placements for the second-year candidates’ fieldwork. The program provides all of the schools’ psychological services, and the schools provide strong social support and work actively with the program faculty. Candidates in the behavior analysis program are placed in the CABAS (Comprehensive Application of Behavior Analysis to Schooling) schools, which work in close collaboration with the program faculty.
Teachers College developed programs that addressed the high attrition rate of inner city teachers; the need for qualified teachers in math, science, and English as a second language in New York and other cities; and the need for alternative routes to teaching careers. A Peace Corps Fellows Program was established in 1985 that falls within New York State’s transitional B certificate program requirements. This twenty-year program prepares returned Peace Corps volunteers for teaching careers in subjects for which there are critical shortages of teachers in New York City.
42 Over 400 of the program’s graduates are now teaching in 50 hard-to-staff city schools. Seventy Peace Corps fellows are currently enrolled in the program and are serving approximately 50 schools in the city of New York.
B. Design, implementation and evaluation of field experiences and clinical practice
Initial Initial teacher candidates progress from simple observations of classrooms to whole class teaching. During observations, candidates observe students, teachers, and classrooms; take notes; and reflect on their observations. Teacher candidates make connections between theory and practice in weekly university-based seminars. Teacher candidates reported in interviews that they found the weekly seminar sessions to be good ways to communicate with peers, share ideas between programs, and have faculty support. All initial teacher candidates are required to complete 100 clock hours of fieldwork (including observation) prior to student teaching. Programs that have teaching placements in two semesters require 50 clock hours of observation prior to each student teaching experience. Student teaching allows candidates to gradually develop pedagogical knowledge and professional skills and increase teaching responsibilities from working with students on a one-to-one basis to small group instruction to whole class lessons, including design and implementation of curricula, classroom management, and assessment of learning. All initial teacher candidates are required to complete two student teaching experiences of at least 20 days each in settings appropriate for the type of teacher certificate they are planning to obtain.
Advanced Education leadership candidates complete program case studies and action research projects as part of their field experiences. Because field experiences are imbedded within coursework, the program enables candidates to connect theory with practice and to develop and apply leadership knowledge. In addition to fieldwork projects, all candidates are required to complete a minimum of 200 hours for master’s candidates in clinical sites or other professional settings. In addition to a 200-hour building-level internship, advanced candidates are strongly recommended to complete a 200-hour district-level internship.
The school psychology program provides candidates with practica and internship experience with clients. Fieldwork experiences for candidates consist of an average of one day per week in assessment during the first year, two days per week or 600 hours during the second year, and a minimum of 1200 hours in the third year. Candidates who want an APA/APPIC approved internship that is not in a school setting must do two externships over two years, one in a hospital/community clinic and one in a school based setting. Each semester must be a minimum of 600 hours over an academic year.
Candidates in the school counseling program participate in a minimum of two semesters of fieldwork. School counseling candidates participate in internships for a minimum of two full days per week. Responsibilities include maintaining a caseload; running groups; and collaborating with school staff, teachers, and community agencies. School counselors make appropriate referrals, design and implement programs, and meet weekly with their supervisors.
43 Table 16. Summary of Field Experience and Clinical Practice Requirements
Programs Field experience[1] Clinical practice[2] Initial teacher -100 clock hours of field two college-supervised student teaching experiences education experiences related to coursework of at least 20 school days each prior to student teaching (incl. observation)
-field-based projects in core courses Advanced teacher 50 clock hours of fieldwork action research project to be completed in education candidate’s own classroom -field-based projects in core courses Education leadership -field-based projects in core college-supervised internship: 200 hours for EDM courses and EDD candidates; 600 hours for FSAA School counseling -field-based projects in core two semesters of school-based fieldwork of at least courses and TC’s clinic two full days a week School psychology two semesters of supervised two semesters of school-based practicum of at least practicum at TC’s clinic two days a week; full-time school-based internship of 1,200 hours
two externships (doctoral candidates only)
[1] Field experiences represent a variety of early and ongoing school-based opportunities in which candidates must observe, assist, tutor, instruct, or conduct applied research.
[2] Clinical practice includes student teaching and internships that provide candidates with experiences that allow for full immersion in the learning community so that candidates are able to demonstrate proficiencies in the professional roles for which they are preparing.
Teachers College provides opportunities for candidates to apply knowledge to all professional tasks. They are able to put theory into practice and to immediately apply what they learn in their courses. Some examples of fieldwork/action research projects include classroom observations of bilingual/bicultural education, child inquiry in elementary education, and family interview support in special education.
All initial and advanced candidates are required to demonstrate appropriate knowledge, skills, and dispositions during their classroom teachings or professional practices. All candidates reflect upon and analyze their teaching experiences consistent with the inquiry stance of the conceptual framework, fieldwork, student teaching, and internship experiences. The experiences provided are analyzed individually and collaboratively. Evidence of development of analytical and reflective approaches are found in candidate portfolios and journals and in dialogues with cooperating teachers, supervisors and faculty.
C. Candidates’ development and demonstration of knowledge, skills and dispositions to help all students learn
44 All programs have requirements for admission with developed rubrics. Candidates in initial programs are assessed at decision points including during coursework, during clinical practice, and at program completion. Candidates in advanced programs are assessed at admission, during clinical practice, and at program completion. Specific requirements at each decision point vary by program; however, each program’s requirements are linked to the conceptual framework. Candidates receive systematic, ongoing assessment in all professional education programs from their university supervisors and cooperating practitioners. Assessments include reflective journals and papers, unit and lesson plans, active participation during student teaching seminars, oral presentations, special projects, and portfolios. The student teaching portfolios represent reflections, resumes, lesson plans, and work samples from P-12 students' work and candidates' own work. Incorporated into many of the candidates' portfolios are candidates' use of technology within lessons presented. The elementary education program, which has the largest number of initial teacher candidates, made technology one of the criteria for student teaching site selection. Candidates in special education are expected to meet program requirements of assistive technology to help all students learn. Graphing behaviors and individualizing curriculum are a few examples of technology usage by special education candidates. Science education, teaching of social studies, and teaching of English have aligned technology requirements into activities such as classroom lessons. Other programs are beginning to align technology requirements with program expectations for candidates.
Reflection and feedback is an expected outcome of collaboration between the candidate and school-based faculty, as well as unit faculty. The self-assessments are reviewed daily by candidates and weekly by unit faculty. Broadly defined expectations of candidates in all professional education programs are further elaborated by programs and individual faculty members based on professional and state standards.
The unit systematically ensures that all candidates in initial and advanced education programs have opportunities to work with students with exceptionalities and from diverse populations by adhering to New York State guidelines. Professional education faculty design fieldwork and student teaching/internship experiences so that they provide candidates with experiences in a variety of communities and with varied groups of student populations. Examples include: English Language learners, socio-economically disadvantaged students, and students with disabilities. Fieldwork settings are in a very diverse metropolitan area in New York City.
Table 17. School Diversity Characteristics
Schools that serve P-12 students … % Schools More than 50 percent of whom are non-white 75.0% More than 50 percent of whom are African American 9.4% More than 50 percent of whom are Asian and Other 7.7% More than 50 percent of whom are Hispanic 20.8% More than 50 percent of whom are Eligible for Free Lunch 45.8% More than 10 percent of whom are Recent Immigrants 16.3% More than 10 percent of whom are Students with Special Needs 50.9% More than 10 percent of whom are English Language Learners 25.4%
45 Student teaching opportunities are coordinated by individual programs and staff in the Office of Teacher Education and School-based Support Services in order to provide candidates with a broad range of experiences in working with diverse students in P-12 settings. Placement schools differ in size and resources and include different kinds of schools—large neighborhood schools, small alternative schools, independent schools, comprehensive schools, magnet schools, theme schools, and schools-within-a-school. School placements also include schools with a wide variety of instructional programs, emphases, and approaches. Over 300 schools in the metropolitan area of New York City are connected with Teachers College to accept candidates for placement.
All professional education programs ensure high quality of clinical experiences by evaluating the quality of internship placements and student teaching through surveys, and informally through regular site visits. In addition to regular communication with school-based teachers and clinicians, the unit’s faculty provides means for cooperating practitioners to provide feedback anonymously to Teachers College through the use of school site surveys and through the OTE/SSS school site evaluations. Examples include: practicum placement evaluation survey, practicum student internship survey and placement questionnaires. The database is maintained by the OTE/SSS. A review of a 2004 graduate survey data demonstrated that for the most part, graduates were satisfied or very satisfied that the unit prepared them well. The return rate of 12 percent was rather low for this survey, but the unit has already taken action to increase this rate. Forty-seven respondents (82%) believe that Teachers College adequately (27) or very well (20) prepared them for career in P-12 education. Forty-seven (82%) are satisfied (20) and very satisfied with their experience at Teachers College.
Overall Assessment of Standard
Overwhelming satisfaction was noted from the majority of the programs. At both the initial and advanced levels, the design, implementation, and evaluation of the field experiences prepare candidates for professional careers in education through high-quality field experiences. School partners work closely with the unit’s faculty in the design and implementation of these experiences. The student outcomes of these experiences are aligned with state and national standards and reflect the unit’s conceptual framework. The assessment system is clearly evidenced in the field experiences and clinical practice. Candidates have experiences with diverse P-12 students, reflect on these experiences, and are mentored to ensure the quality of the experiences.
Recommendation: MET
Areas for Improvement:
None
46
STANDARD 4. DIVERSITY
The unit designs, implements, and evaluates curriculum and experiences for candidates to acquire and apply the knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn. These experiences include working with diverse higher education and school faculty, diverse candidates, and diverse students in P-12 schools.
Levels: Initial and Advanced
Teachers College-Columbia University offers in excess of 75 programs and degrees, from initial teaching certification to the Ed.D. and Ph.D. Spread across nine departments, these programs share a common emphasis on social justice which is, as mentioned earlier, one of the three philosophical stances that provide the foundation for the unit’s conceptual framework. The unit regards the outcome of this social justice stance as candidates who collaborate across differences in and beyond their school communities, while demonstrating a commitment to social justice.
Several illustrations of the tenacity with which Teachers College has historically addressed social justice, and thus diversity, are provided. For example, during the summers from the 1920s to the 1950s, until the Brown v. Board of Education decision, the unit educated thousands of Southern black teachers and principals who were unable to attend universities in their own states. In recent years, faculty has been drawn to the difficult issues surrounding their location in an urban area that is particularly large and contemporary, and has once again embraced the challenges found therein.
Ensuring candidate success in this demanding urban environment begins as early as the admission process, when they are assessed for, among other things: dispositional evidence of their awareness of diversity and equity issues, a respect for and value of diversity, a commitment to working with diverse populations, a commitment to working in diverse settings, and the use of capacity vs. deficit language. This criterion is common across all program admission requirements, with an analysis of data determining that in excess of 90 percent of candidates a the initial and advanced levels were at least minimally acceptable (see Table 18). Those candidates that are rated as minimally acceptable in their awareness of diversity are expected to develop awareness through their experiences within their programs.
Table 18: Candidates’ awareness of diversity levels at admission to the unit
Ratings Initial Programs Advanced Programs Unacceptable 9% 8% Minimally acceptable 26% 24% Acceptable 41% 32% Excellent 24% 37%
47 A. Design, implementation, and evaluation of curriculum and experiences
As a result of this unit’s long-standing mission, and as directed by the conceptual framework, graduates are expected to demonstrate proficiency in social justice and diversity. The total of all expected knowledge, skills, and dispositions are presented in the Master Domain of Learning Outcomes, which is grounded in the conceptual framework and articulates the proficiencies that candidates should demonstrate at program completion (see Standard 2). The identified proficiencies related to social justice have been lifted from that document and are presented in the table below:
Table 19: Diversity-related knowledge, skills, and dispositions Standard 3: Learner Centered Standard 5: Advocates of Social Educators Justice and Diversity Knowledge: K3.2 Knowledge about learners K5.1 Knowledge about and learning democracy, equity, and schooling K3.3 Knowledge about curriculum and teaching Skills in: S3.1 Planning of curriculum S5.1 Use of strategies to address and/or services inequalities in the classroom, S3.2 Implementation of school, and society instruction and/or services S3.3 Social behavior management S3.4 Assessment and evaluation Dispositions: D3.1 Commitment to the fullest D5.1 Respect for and value of possible growth and development diversity and commitment to of all students social justice
To clarify these proficiencies, and to facilitate their translation into practice, faculty participated in a research project developed by ten Teachers College doctoral candidates in 2003. The process was conducted through what the unit identified as the Spencer seminar. This multi-faceted project examined ways in which social justice is, or could be, infused into the unit’s educational programs. Surveys revealed the top five purposes, attitudes, and approaches as determined by 42 of 44 participating faculty. These findings are presented in Table 19:
Table 19: Top five attributes of a social justice stance (chosen by faculty, n=42) Purposes Attitudes Approaches Develop critical perspectives in Value and understand diverse Use culturally responsive teachers about schools, learners (43%, 18) pedagogy (45%, 19) schooling, teaching, learning, curriculum (50%, 21) Prepare teachers to work toward Engage in reflective practice Integrate life experiences of equity in society (45%, 19) (29%, 12) students and teaching into the curriculum (33%, 14) Prepare teachers for teaching in View teaching as a moral and Create a community of a democratic society (33%, 14) political act (29%, 12) learning (33%, 14) Prepare teachers who will Take an inquiry stance toward Adopt inclusive practices facilitate social change (33%, teaching (26%, 11) (29%, 12) 14) Prepare teachers to engage in Understand role of power and Run a democratic classroom social action (26%,11) oppression in society (21%,9) (26%,11)
48
Once defined, faculty set out to ensure the infusion of social justice, and thus diversity, across programs. As a result, opportunities to work with these expected knowledge, skills, and dispositions now appear in some form in most class work and elsewhere, with several courses directly targeting this proficiency. For example, 27 core courses support an emphasis on diversity. Candidates are required to take one of them (according to NYS Department of Education regulations), and eight courses with a multicultural focus were offered in Fall 2004.
In addition, methods courses provide candidates with opportunities to directly apply their knowledge, skills, and dispositions as they design instruction and assessment that incorporate issues of diversity. Courses across both initial and advanced programs require a number of work products that target social justice; for example: leadership case studies, unit plans, readings with subsequent discussions, field experiences, journals as dialogue tools, portfolios, planned interventions using basic counseling skills, and ongoing feedback. See Standard 1 for a discussion of the assessment results. In summary, candidates interviewed expressed a full awareness of social justice and its role in their educational discipline. Candidates indicated during interviews that coursework feedback targets social justice, and the notation that course feedback is usually provided immediately. They also stressed the ready availability of their professors, whom they meet with when necessary to clarify and respond to feedback provided.
The unit also supplies multiple opportunities for candidates to grow and apply these specific knowledge, skills, and dispositions in settings other than those found within the traditional college classroom. Two examples lend clarification to this point. First, candidates and faculty from the unit work with more than 400 public schools in New York City, and in excess of 1200 across the United States. Second, the unit annually hosts a number of events featuring discussions on issues related to diversity, educational equity, and other aspects of social justice. They note a total of 53 events that have been held or are scheduled for the 2004-2005 term, with events ranging from book signings and discussions to film screenings and conferences. Topics feature an examination of the complex issues surrounding diversity and social justice, including a Mellon Scholar Colloquium Series on “Ethics, Morality, and Pedagogy.” There were 14 events reported for the January 8-April 27, 2004 period. This level of diversity programming was supported by the on-site visit.
In closing, the candidate data portion of the Spencer seminar research team summarized the level of candidate satisfaction with their preparation to teach for social justice. Specifically candidates were asked to “indicate how satisfied you feel about your teacher education program’s attention to social justice in the following three elements.”
Table 20: Program Efficacy in Preparing Candidates to Teach for Social Justice (n= 140) Very Somewhat Somewhat Very satisfied dissatisfied dissatisfied satisfied Articulating the purpose(s) of 5.7% 22.9% 45.0% 26.4% teaching for social justice Encouraging you to develop 5.0% 20.7% 44.1% 32.9% attitudes and understandings to teach for social justice Helping you to develop curricular 9.3% 23.6% 49.3% 17.9%
49 approaches and teaching strategies to teach for social justice
From this measure, there is some evidence to suggest that some candidates were dissatisfied with the unit’s ability to articulate the purposes of teaching for social justice, to encourage attitudes and understandings to teach for social justice, and to assist with developing curricular strategies.
B. Experiences working with diverse faculty
The recruitment and retention of diverse faculty is a goal of the unit, with the following results reported for the current year:
Table 21:Demographics on Faculty (Professional: n=99; Other: n=57; School-based faculty=data not kept) Professional Other faculty School-based Education within the faculty Faculty institution N (%) N (%) No Data American Indian or Alaskan Native -- -- ND Asian or Pacific Islander 8 (8%) 4 (7%) ND Black, non-Hispanic 7 (7%) 6 (11%) ND Hispanic 5 (5%) 3 (5%) ND White, non-Hispanic 79 (78%) 44 (77%) ND Two or more races -- -- ND Other -- -- ND Race/ethnicity unknown -- -- ND Total 99 57 ND
Female 60 (61%) 31 (54%) ND Male 39 (39%) 26 (46%) ND Table Explanation: The same faculty teaches initial and advanced candidates. The professional education faculty include all faculty that teach required courses taken by candidates in the professional education programs; not all of them have primary responsibilities for professional education programs.
Although data is not currently kept on the school-based teachers, a database is now in place which will begin to address this need for specific demographic information. One frequently used clinical site is Heritage School, a high school that can be used here to illustrate the demographics of a school-based faculty. The table below shows their diversity in this Harlem school of 300 students (minority student population: 60 percent Latino, 35 percent African American, five percent Asian, White, and other):
Table 22. Faculty Demographics at Heritage School (n=27) White 63% (17) African American 15% (4) Latino 15% (4) Asian 7% (2) Total 27
Both faculty and candidates reported multiple opportunities to interact with diverse faculty on a regular basis. Three of many examples illustrate this point. First, programs generally include
50 courses from more than one department so that candidates interact with professors from several areas. Student teaching and internship supervisors add an additional layer of faculty-student interaction, as do cooperating teachers in the field. Second, and as discussed earlier in this standard, the unit sponsors multiple college-wide events that specifically address diversity, with professors, candidates, and the larger community encouraged to attend; for example, this last year of record has seen 53 such events, ranging from book signings to on-site conferences. Third, the unit invites long- and short-term scholars to present on topics related to diversity, educational opportunity, and equity. One specific example is the Mellon Visiting Minority Scholars Program, which is ongoing through 2005. These scholars co-teach; lead small group discussions that include candidates, faculty, and the community; consult on continuing research projects; and participate in panels and debates.
Unit faculty are well-equipped to work with their candidates on issues of diversity, as the majority regularly lecture, research, and present on related topics (see Standard 5 for details). More specifically, a minimum of 50-60 percent have published on topics related to social justice, including multicultural education, multicultural and cross-cultural counseling, bilingual/bicultural education, educational opportunity and equity, urban education and urban school reform, teacher education for urban and multicultural contexts, culturally responsive teaching, disability studies, inclusion, gender issues in education, multicultural feminisms and feminist pedagogies, and citizenship and civic education.
Continuing to build on this scholarly research base is important to the faculty, and they report that they take recruitment seriously. The result has been steady growth in their minority faculty, as indicated by Table 23:
Table 23: Percentage of Minority Faculty
2003-2004 22%
2002-2003 19%
2001-2002 17%
2000-2001 15%
Among other venues, the unit recruits in publications designed to reach both minority groups and women; for example, Black Issues and Hispanic Outlook, as well as the more traditional Chronicle of Higher Education and AERA.net. Often other advertisements are posted based on an individual program’s Affirmative Action Plan. Finally, the unit also enjoys the benefits of an established Target of Opportunity (TOPS) program, which is designed to increase faculty diversity by attracting highly visible candidates of outstanding promise or achievement who are members of minority groups, or who are persons with disabilities. Two education faculty have been hired through TOPS.
C. Experiences working with diverse candidates
The unit’s commitment to diversity is generally reflected in its student body, which includes candidates from 50 states and 80 countries. These candidates report that they enjoy regular
51 interactions with each other and that they not only socialize but also form study and discussion groups, attend unit-sponsored events, work together, and participate in any number of multiple student organizations like the African Studies Working Group, the Coalition of Latino/a Scholars, the Black Student Network, and the Chinese Student Association. Candidate diversity is summarized in the table below:
Table 24: Gender and ethnicity characteristics of professional education candidates Teacher Education Programs Professional Education Programs Fall'01 % Fall'02 % Fall'03 % Fall'01 % Fall'02 % Fall'03 % Race/Ethnicity Asian/Pacific 108 9 117 9 143 11 46 9 44 9 43 8 Islander Black, Not 98 8 81 6 82 6 68 13 66 13 66 12 Hispanic Hispanic 65 6 69 5 87 7 37 7 34 7 31 6 White, Not 606 53 705 56 680 53 294 55 288 56 300 56 Hispanic Other 30 3 33 3 33 3 9 2 13 2 14 3 Data Unavailable 144 13 176 14 141 11 52 9 43 8 46 9
Non-Resident 96 8 89 7 110 9 30 5 23 5 32 6 Alien Total 1147 100 1270 100 1276 100 536 100 511 100 533 100 Gender Female 964 84 1043 82 1057 83 398 74 378 74 396 74 Male 183 16 223 17 213 16 138 26 132 26 136 26 Unknown 0 0 4 1 6 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 Total 1147 100 1270 100 1276 100 536 100 511 511 533 100
The additional recruitment of candidates, and particularly those who represent diverse populations, is a part of unit’s ongoing work. To enhance these efforts, the unit reported nine different good faith initiatives, including: developing a 2003-2004 Minority Recruitment Plan, establishing a relationship with several Historically Black Colleges and Universities, hosting a students-of-color online chat, recruiting candidates through the McNair Scholars Program, participating in Project 1000 (including application waivers), and presenting at the Institute for the Recruitment of Teachers. An increased effort to support newly-admitted minority candidates is also planned. In addition, the unit grants approximately six million dollars annually in scholarships and fellowships, including funds for the International Student Scholarship and Minority Student Scholarship (11 and 41 percent of the total respectively).
Two specific illustrations share some results of these recruitment efforts. First, data collected by the Office of Access and Services for Individuals with Disabilities show that enrollment of disabled candidates grew from 40 in 1994 to 361 in 2003. Also, data provided by the Office of International Services indicates that 595 students from 78 countries enrolled in master’s (276) and doctoral (248) programs in fall 2003, which are also increases.
52
In summary, the pilot Exit and Graduate Survey (n=57) showed that unit graduates were generally satisfied (35%) or very satisfied (35%) with the diversity of candidates in their programs. They also either agreed (35%) or strongly agreed (40%) that they had multiple opportunities for interactions with diverse populations.
C. Experiences working with diverse students in P-12 schools
New York City provides a complex and unique environment for candidates, as it is one of the most diverse metropolitan areas in the United States. The table below captures this diversity, which includes the city’s 400 schools with whom the unit works:
Table 25: New York City’s P-12 student characteristics (NYC Board of Education, 2003) Elementary Schools Middle Schools High Schools % of enrollment % of enrollment % of enrollment
White 15% 15% 16% Black 32% 33% 35% Hispanic 40% 39% 35% Asian and Other 13% 13% 14% Male 51% 51% 50% Female 49% 49% 50% Recent Immigrants 8% 8% 10% Eligible for free lunch 75% 72% 54% Special Education (all schools) ND ND 12% English Language Learners (all schools) ND ND 13%
Because initial and advanced candidates are required to complete field experiences in a high- needs school, they are constantly exposed to the diversity found within the populations described above. More specifically, they work in schools, clinics, and professional settings that include, but are not limited to: multicultural populations, schools that are 100 percent minority, schools that target English Language Learners, immigrant populations, disabled populations in inclusive classrooms, and schools with children of poverty. In addition, programs strive to expose candidates to various sized schools, alternative schools, independent schools, magnet and themed schools, and schools within-a-school. Their selected sites also include wide varieties of instructional programs and emphases in a variety of clinical sites and professional settings that include diverse clients. This findings was affirmed in interviews with candidates and practitioners and through student teaching visits.
Specifically, data supplied by the Office of Teacher Education and School-Based Support Services showed that during the 2003-2004 year, 75 percent of the P-12 schools where student teacher candidates were placed (n=61) had a student population of more than 50 percent ethnic minority. In 46 percent of the schools, more than 50 percent of the students were eligible for free or reduced lunch, and 51 percent of the sites categorized more than 10 percent of its students as having special needs. Finally, in 24 percent of the schools, more than 10 percent of students were English Language Learners.
53
As described in the opening section of this standard, Heritage School is one such example. This high school site was founded by a Teachers College art professor and is dedicated to educating the poor and minority children of East Harlem. Described as a “teaching hospital” by the principal during an on-site visit, it is staffed by many unit candidates who are either full-time teachers or who intern there. The school reported that its primary mission was to provide for the deep educational and developmental needs of its population, of whom 95 percent are minority.
The Teachers College Professional Development School Partnership (formed 1988) is also closely linked to the unit’s school outreach activities. Their participation provides a second example of school sites where TC candidates work and intern. It serves as a collaborative between Community School District 3 (five schools, 4000 students, 75% minority, 60% free and reduced lunch), the NYC Alternative High School Division, the United Federation of Teachers, and several of the Teachers College programs.
Once candidates graduate and begin teaching, they often find that they continue to need the guidance once provided by the unit. The New Teacher Academy (established 1998) was designed to provide that direction, as it supports new teachers through continuous mentoring with issues such as skill building, morale, and a commitment to urban teaching. Most of this work is currently centered in District 32 in Brooklyn and District 5 in Harlem. Once a serious problem, attrition rates have dramatically improved in these sites. Prior to the onset of this work, both districts experienced an attrition of approximately 65 percent of its first-year teachers. Now, however, 94 percent of participating teachers have remained in their positions. Partnerships with other districts around the country are currently being formed, with pilot programs underway in several U.S. cities and in the Philippines.
The unit reports the use of various assessment instruments to ensure the development of the skills, knowledge, and dispositions required of TC candidates during their fieldwork; for example: journal reflections, post-observation conferences with university supervisors, and assignments required during student teaching seminars. Assignments monitored by the school’s cooperating teacher include, among others, an assessment of the ability to: adapt instructional plans to diverse learners, plan with appropriate levels of development targeted, and exhibit an appreciation for diversity. Feedback is provided by both the unit’s supervisor and the school’s cooperating teacher. (See Standard 1 for details.)
Overall Assessment of Standard
Teachers College-Columbia University has clearly defined its candidate outcomes as they relate to social justice, and thus diversity for both initial and advanced programs. These knowledge, skills, and dispositions are highlighted and assessed throughout course curricula and field experiences. Candidates have multiple opportunities to work with diverse faculty across several departments and professional situations, and they transfer this knowledge into school sites that are generally 85 percent or more minority. Candidates also have opportunities to work with diverse candidates from within the U.S. and from other nations. There was evidence from survey data to suggest that some candidates were not satisfied with their preparation for social justice teaching in the initial programs, but these data were not supported in interviews with candidates.
54 Given the commitment to social justice, the curricular content related to social justice and diversity, as well as the other programmatic efforts focused on diversity, the team did not find strong evidence to suggest an area for improvement in this standard.
Recommendation: MET
Areas for Improvement: None
55 STANDARD 5. FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS, PERFORMANCE, AND DEVELOPMENT
Faculty are qualified and model best professional practices in scholarship, service, and teaching, including the assessment of their own effectiveness as related to candidate performance; they also collaborate with colleagues in the disciplines and schools. The unit systematically evaluates faculty performance and facilitates professional development.
A. Qualified faculty
For the year of 2003-2004 Teachers College employed 33 professors, 31 associate professors, and 30 assistant professors in tenure-track positions; 97 adjunct instructors and lecturers; and 51 clinical faculty/supervisors of field experiences. In addition, there was one professor of practice, two visiting professors and one visiting associate professor. During this year the unit had a 21 percent minority population for tenure-track faculty, with 8.3 percent Black, 7.7 percent Asian, and 5.1 percent Hispanic. During the past five years there has been a six percent increase in the number of diverse faculty. Adjunct and part-time faculty diversity statistics include three percent Hispanic, five percent Black, seven percent Asian, and 0.6 percent Native American.
All professorial rank tenured and tenure track-faculty hold doctoral degrees or terminal degrees in the academic fields in which they are assigned. After reviewing over 150 curricular vitae, it was evident that clinical faculty, tenure-track faculty, and non-tenure track faculty have the appropriate credentials for their assignments. All clinical faculty in the professional education unit have professional or teaching experience in the area in which they are assigned to teach and or supervise. This was affirmed by interviews and after a careful review of faculty vitae. Cooperating teachers and other school professionals such as administrators, counselors, and psychologists who supervise candidates on site have a certificate and appropriate experience in the areas in which they teach or supervise. All professorial faculty possess doctoral degrees or terminal degrees in their academic field. After reviewing teaching schedules for two semesters it is evident that faculty, adjunct faculty, teaching assistants and clinical faculty are assigned teaching responsibilities appropriate to their preparation.
Cooperating teachers are experienced and are certified in the teaching discipline in which candidates are assigned. Cooperating teachers average 8.7 years of experience, and interviews with principals, teachers and field supervisors indicated that no cooperating teacher has less than three years of teaching experience. Additionally 81.6 percent of the cooperating teachers hold a master’s degree. Seventy-three percent of the university supervisors hold a master’s degree and 21.4 percent hold a doctorate. On average, university supervisors have 15 years of experience in their roles, as well as five years of supervising student teachers and many years of classroom experience.
B. Modeling best professional practices in teaching
The unit’s assessment of faculty teaching is accomplished in a variety of ways. As part of the tenure and promotion review for tenure-track faculty, the unit emphasizes the importance of teaching. Candidates evaluate faculty teaching throughout the program and use surveys to inform
56 the unit about teaching within the Teachers College. Candidates respond to several indicators of quality on questionnaires about faculty knowledge of pedagogical content. On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being strongly agree, no indicator related to pedagogical content knowledge was rated lower than 2.00. Responses from candidates on faculty members' valuing candidate learning also garnered positive results. The ratings on the indicators ranged from 1.79 to 1.33, indicating that candidates believed that faculty valued and enhanced candidate learning. The pilot exit graduate survey indicated that 75 percent of candidates were satisfied or very satisfied with instruction provided by faculty. There was no evidence of graduate surveys conducted for those candidates who have been out of the program for over two years.
A review of over a hundred syllabi as well as information shared during interviews with candidates indicate that faculty integrate the conceptual framework and ongoing assessment procedures during instruction and course assignments. Instructional strategies, identified during interviews and reflected in syllabi, used by faculty include portfolios, case studies, role playing, hands-on activities, projects, performance-based assessment, practicum-based assignments, some web-based assignments, and numerous other strategies.
It is evident from reading candidates’ work samples that faculty expect candidates to demonstrate reflection, critical thinking, problem solving and professional dispositions as defined by the program and unit. Evaluations and ongoing assessments identified in syllabi and affirmed in interviews indicate that all candidates must demonstrate the above-identified expectations. These skills are reflected in syllabi, program assessment strategies, and student work samples provided by the candidates throughout all of the unit’s programs.
Teachers College PT3 grant was acquired to enhance and improve the use of technology throughout the unit. Between 2000 and 2004 numerous professional development activities occurred for faculty that led to building a K-12 software collection, creating online courses, developing candidate portfolios using technology, and integrating software into candidate projects. The PT3 grant focused primarily on the initial teacher education program and impacted approximately 50 faculty directly. The PT3 grant directly influenced the development and use of web-based courses. During the last three years of the PT3 grant courses that utilize web-based elements or are delivered as distance education classes via the web increased from five to over 45 classes in 2005.
In a pilot survey conducted in 2003-2004 (N=57), 37 percent of candidates were not satisfied with the integration of technology in the unit’s programs. A review of syllabi and statements made during interviews with candidates and faculty indicates an inconsistency throughout the unit’s programs in the use and modeling of technology by faculty.
C. Modeling best professional practices in scholarship
Expectations for scholarship by Teachers College faculty are extensive and include the following definitions: formulations and or testing of hypotheses by empirical methods; extension of existing knowledge or theory to new contexts of conditions; synthesis or analysis of existing knowledge or theory to develop new or broader more general theory; discovery of new facts or
57 principles through scientific, historical, and philosophical inquiry; and application of existing knowledge, procedures, or theory to the solution of current issues or problems.
Faculty are extensively involved in numerous types of scholarship and utilize the work to enhance instruction and to provide service. Review of syllabi and interviews with candidates, faculty, and practitioners made it evident that faculty scholarship is used to enhance instruction and to inform the profession. During the past five years the unit’s faculty produced 445 refereed articles, 164 book chapters, and 91 books. Tenure-track faculty also made over 800 conference presentations. Faculty are involved in grant writing, and for the academic year of 2003-2004 the unit received over $28,000,000 in funded projects and research. It is estimated that during the 2004-2005 academic year faculty would generate over $ 32,000,000 in external funding. Scholarship and grant writing clearly reflects the unit’s conceptual framework and meets the expectations as outlined in the faculty Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Principles as stated in the Faculty Handbook.
After reviewing faculty vitae, it is evident that all tenure track faculty at Teachers College are expected to and do participate in rich and extensive scholarship. The roots of this extensive research expectation can be traced through the faculty recruitment documents that articulate these expectations, the faculty promotion and tenure document, and the conceptual framework of the unit.
D. Modeling best professional practices in service
Similar to scholarship, service is an expectation for faculty in Teachers College and is demonstrated by the numerous committees that faculty serve on and activities within the profession in which faculty participate. The unit has at least thirteen college-wide committees within the unit, and over 70 faculty members participate on these committees. In addition, the unit has over thirty active centers and institutes that are lead by Teachers College faculty. These centers and institutes provide service to a variety of practitioners and scholars. Some of the centers and institutes are: Center for Arts Education, Center for the Opportunities for People with Disabilities, Center for the Professional Education of Teachers, Creative Arts Laboratory, Klingenstein Center (education leadership), Urban Science Education Center, and Rita Gold Early Childhood Center. The unit provided information about numerous other centers and institutes that provide services to professionals in a variety of educational fields including K-12. These centers and institutes are extensively involved in service initiatives for practicing educators, public agencies and school districts. The seminars, workshops, ongoing professional activities, and research programs that serve the profession make a significant contribution in both service and scholarship.
After reviewing faculty vitae and conducting interviews with candidates, faculty, and practitioners, it is apparent that Teachers College faculty are highly sought after to provide service to K-12 schools and professional educators. Almost all faculty in the past two years have been involved in some type of interaction with schools or professional practitioners in their academic field. Clinical faculty members are extensively involved in day-to-day activities with practitioners that lead to many service opportunities. This was supported by interviews with school personnel and confirmed in faculty vitae.
58
Service to the profession at the state, regional, and national levels is consistent with the unit’s mission and the conceptual framework. Faculty serve on numerous advisory boards, special interest groups, national committees and are members of the national organizations, related to their fields of study. As members of regional, national, and international organizations, faculty serve as editors, editorial board members, presidents, chairs, and editors-in-chief of journals.
E. Collaboration
PDS partnerships are examples of the unit’s collaborative initiatives. The unit has developed and implemented professional development school charters that guide the communication and expectations for the professional development school groups and participating partners. Several programs in teacher education participate in PDS partnerships, including bilingual/bicultural education, elementary education, teaching of social studies, early childhood education, and technology specialist.
Several collaborative projects and professional development activities have influenced the teacher education program and candidate learning. The National Challenge Grant, the unit’s Center for Technology and School Change and the PT3 grant have worked with elementary educators and candidates to integrate technology in teaching. Some of the candidates from the unit are now able to work with these teachers as mentors and or cooperating teachers. These collaborative projects have directly impacted the use of technology both on campus and at off- campus locations. The Urban Science Education Fellows Program places candidates with teachers and graduate students in partnership schools to conduct action research. Because of this work a new set of science education courses now exist and concentrate on science education in urban settings.
The Metropolitan School Study Council is a 63-year-old organization that represents a network involving 22 school districts in three states. MSSC was organized in 1941 to assist superintendents but has matured into a more comprehensive collaborative focusing on improving instruction, innovation, and school improvement. Doctoral students in Teachers College work with the school districts fulfilling practicum assignments and assisting schools with a variety of school improvement initiatives. This type of collaboration assists candidates in better understanding the challenges facing teachers, administrators, and other practitioners involved in K-12 education.
Teachers College Reading and Writing Project is a collaborative program that coordinates summer institutes for practitioners and is developed in collaboration with input from academic scholars and practitioners. Teachers College candidates can participate in workshops and staff development activities sponsored by the project during the program and also after graduation. Feedback from individuals who participated indicates that teaching and instructional activities are impacted in a positive way and assist participants in improving instructional approaches by on-campus faculty, candidates, and practitioners.
59
F. Unit evaluation of professional education faculty performance
Evaluation of faculty members seeking promotion or tenure involve the collection of data on the quality of faculty teaching, scholarship and service which are documented in faculty vitae, candidate evaluations, and exit surveys of candidates. The evaluation of non-tenured faculty identified as “term faculty” is conducted one time during the appointment of the “term faculty” member’s assignment whether the appointment is for three or six years, This evaluation occurs in the second year of the appointment. Evaluation of pre-tenured faculty involves feedback from candidates in the form of course evaluations, the chair’s review of scholarship and service during the previous academic year, and review by tenured faculty.
Annual reappointment reviews for non-tenured faculty members are conducted by department chairs, and written reports of meetings are sent to the faculty member and forwarded to the dean. The Policy Regarding Reappointment Procedures and Evidence clearly articulates how the unit will assess a faculty member’s request for promotion and tenure. Faculty are required to furnish a curriculum vita, a statement of professional plans, a copy of each scholarly product, evaluations of teaching, external evaluation letters, and any other relevant materials. Reviewers include department faculty, department chair, dean, president and the Board of Trustees. Procedures require that each group or individual review the faculty member’s application for promotion and or tenure. For promotion to tenure, a Standing Committee on Appointment and Tenure is also involved in the review process. Promotion to full professor includes a review by the Standing Committee on Promotion to Full Professor.
Non-tenure track faculty, “term faculty,” reviewed for reappointment are expected to present the documentation outlined above by the end of the second year. These non-tenure track appointments are referred to as “term appointments” and vary in length from three to six years. Reviews are conducted by the department faculty, department chair, dean, president and Board of Trustees one time during the faculty member’s appointment.
For the year 2003-2004 six faculty members applied for tenure and five were granted tenure. Four individuals requested approval for promotion to full professor and four were promoted. Six “term faculty” sought reappointment and five were granted reappointment. In conversations with faculty and administration this record reflects a typical year in terms of the decisions made regarding the promotion, tenure and renewal of term appointments. The assessment of all faculty seeking promotion or tenure is based on a qualitative approach rather than a quantitative approach. This fits with the mission of the unit and historical precedents set by present and previous faculty. It is the belief of the faculty that performance cannot be reduced to numerical terms in order to determine the quality of a faculty members teaching, scholarship, or service.
The unit has several definitions and titles for instructional staff, including lecturer/senior lecturer, distinguished practitioner, instructor, visiting professor/lecturer/instructor, and adjunct. During interviews with faculty and administration it was apparent that there is discussion about the status and responsibilities of the various appointments within the unit. The issue of “term faculty” and whether this position should continue is under review.
60 The unit did not furnish documents demonstrating that tenured associate professors or full professors with tenure were evaluated in a formal manner by departments or the unit. In discussions with faculty and administration this lack of regular or annual evaluations for tenured faculty was confirmed. The unit did not furnish documentation of yearly formal evaluations for adjunct, clinical faculty, lecturers, instructors and other non-tenure track faculty. In discussion with non-tenure track faculty and other adjunct faculty it was determined that each program used ongoing informal reviews to monitor performance. Course evaluations filled out by candidates and observation of teaching by program coordinators and supervisors are prevalent within the unit. Numerous clinical faculty and non-tenured faculty consistently stated that ongoing supervision was conducted by tenured faculty and program directors within the unit.
It is clear that the philosophy of faculty evaluations meets the unit’s conceptual framework themes of inquiry (research), teaching (curriculum), and service (social justice). Review of faculty scholarship, syllabi, and service records indicate that it is an expectation of the unit that faculty continually integrate the framework in their work.
G. Unit facilitation of professional development
The unit incorporates numerous professional development activities for faculty throughout the year. There is a new faculty orientation program which occurs at the beginning of the academic year and workshops that occur throughout the first year of service for new tenure track faculty. These activities focus on college policies, procedures, grant-writing, and resources. In addition, pre-tenure workshops are available to all faculty who are not yet tenured.
Faculty research symposia are regularly organized by faculty and sponsored by the vice president of academic affairs and the dean of Teachers College. Additionally, informal opportunities to share latest research findings and discuss research issues are a part of the symposia series. As part of the discussions an increased awareness of technology issues and the need to enhance technology integration occurred within the unit.
Because of the new demands placed upon faculty to increase technological integration within instruction the unit sought and received a Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers to Use Technology (PT3) grant. This grant provided software and professional development to faculty that involved the integration of technology in the teacher education program within the unit. The unit and the academic computing office provides technology workshops for faculty and staff.
A stipend of $1,000 per year is available to faculty for travel and research projects. Pre-tenured faculty members are supported with release time to conduct research and/or a research assistant to work on research projects. Additionally pre-tenured faculty receive a $1,500 stipend to support research efforts. The unit also provides start-up monies for pre-tenured faculty when they arrive; this is often negotiated when the faculty member is employed.
It was not evident that evaluations of senior and tenured faculty directly impacted professional development decisions. The unit did provide professional development opportunities for all faculty that involved the PT3 grant and the No Child Left Behind federal initiative. Additionally faculty were also able to participate in a series of workshops that discussed program assessment
61 and performance-based assessment of candidates. The unit also conducted a series of workshops on research conducted by faculty and students around the theme of social justice. Professional development decisions recently have been guided by the unit’s conceptual framework, a desire to enhance technology integration, increased demands by NCLB and preparation for NCATE.
The diversity awards program and minority postdoctoral fellowships aim to increase the number of minority faculty and support faculty projects related to diversity and social justice themes. Funding for these programs is allocated to faculty so they can have release time for research, salary enhancements, research assistance and to enhance teaching. It is evident that the professional development projects directly relate to the unit’s conceptual framework.
Through interviews it was made apparent that workshops and seminars are open to adjunct faculty, research assistants and teaching assistants. Candidates and research assistants, as part of their experience at Teachers College, often are involved in research with faculty that requires participation in seminars and workshops that are part of the professional development program offered by the unit.
Overall Assessment of Standard:
Teachers College has an outstanding faculty with a research and service record that contribute significantly to the profession not only at the regional level but at the national and international level. The scholarly productivity of faculty is at a level that places the unit among the elite programs in the nation. The continuous sustained efforts of faculty have allowed Teachers College to maintain its status among the premier research institutions in the country.
All faculty are not evaluated on an annual basis and technology is not consistently integrated throughout all programs in the unit.
Recommendation: Met
Areas for Improvement:
New The unit does not conduct systematic and comprehensive evaluations for all faculty to improve teaching, scholarship and service.
Rationale: The unit did not provide examples of faculty evaluations in written form for tenured faculty or those who have achieved the rank of full professor. When conducting interviews with faculty and administrators it was confirmed that full professors and tenured associate professors are not evaluated on a systematic basis. Once a faculty member receives tenure or is promoted to full professor there is no ongoing formal evaluation conducted by the unit, the department chair, or a faculty committee.
New The use of technology to enhance instruction is not consistent among programs within the unit.
62
Rationale: Review of syllabi suggested that technology was not integrated in all programs. Interviews with candidates and faculty affirmed that technology integration was inconsistent in the manner in which it was modeled by faculty. Use of technology and the integration in a program or course seemed to depend on which program a candidate was in and or which faculty member taught the course. Not all candidates in all programs had the same access to or instruction in the use of technology.
63
STANDARD 6. UNIT GOVERNANCE AND RESOURCES
The unit has the leadership, authority, budget, personnel, facilities, and resources, including information technology resources, for the preparation of candidates to meet professional, state, and institutional standards.
Level: Initial and Advanced
A. Unit leadership and authority
The professional education unit of Teachers College comprises 28 teacher and other school professional education programs located in nine departments. Teachers College governance modes provide for the effective participation of various sectors of the College community, both in the determination of policies guiding the life of the community and also in the critical appraisal of the implementation of those policies. The organizational chart on page 64 shows the complete structure at the College.
The overall structure of Teachers College consists of 27 members of the Board of Trustees, the president, the chief executive officer of the College, along with the vice president of academic affairs and the dean of the College, the vice president for finance and administration, and the vice president for development and external affairs.
Teachers College has a long affiliation with Columbia University, which gives the unit enormous benefits, including access for faculty and candidates to Columbia’s seven libraries and seven and a half million books. For almost all purposes, Teachers College operates as an independent university.
Faculty participate in governance and decision-making processes in several ways, primarily through faculty committees as well as through advisory boards, task forces, and other cross- College committees. The business of the faculty in general is conducted by the Faculty Executive Committee (FEC), which receives, considers, discusses, and acts upon concerns and proposals as they relate to the educational programs of the College. The work of the FEC and its elected members is organized through four standing subcommittees: the Academic Program Subcommittee; the Subcommittee on Personnel; the Subcommittee on Finance, Facilities, and Support Services; and the Subcommittee on Race, Culture, and Diversity.
Besides governance and authority structures common across all programs, the professional education unit has its own policy committee. The Teacher Education Policy Committee (TEPC) is made up of about 20 to 30 faculty members across the college who are members of programs that prepare professionals for school-based positions. The TEPC has voting members from across departments. This insures collaboration between programs and across the entire College.
In addition to the mechanism above, faculty also participate in the governance and decision- making processes through structures that actively involve the department chairs. Department chairs are members of the faculty and key participants in representing the views of faculty in
64 cross-college forums and settings. As a group, department chairs provide an essential college- wide perspective, especially with respect to matters pertaining to planning, personnel, budgeting, and the organization and functioning of the college.
Practices related to admission and recruitment of candidates are well documented in a range of publications and online information. The Teachers College catalog is revised annually and contains current and comprehensive information for admission practices. Admission practices vary by program but are clearly defined by each program in the publications and catalogues. Catalogs, calendars, publications, grading policies, and advertising materials are reviewed annually and kept up to date. Almost all of the required information can be found online.
The Student Handbook, which is also reviewed annually, gives a thorough listing of services available to students in Teachers College. Advising and counseling are assigned and organized by program directors and chairs. There is an unevenness in advising loads, and some candidates in the various masters’ programs and doctoral programs find it difficult to receive concise and accurate advice on their programs and on their progress.
Faculty participate in program design, implementation, and evaluation. Much is done on the program level since Teachers College is not a highly centralized operation, due in large part to its history as well as its size. There are over 5,000 candidates in 28 different teacher and other professional education programs. The unit does provide mechanisms for collaboration among the 143 faculty through various committees, especially the Faculty Executive Committee (FEC) and the Teacher Education Policy Committee (TEPC).
65 66
B. Unit Budget
The unit’s budget has grown extensively over the past eight years (1996-2003) from $60.9 million to $97.8 million, a compound annual rate of seven percent. The main sources of Teachers College’s revenues are tuition and fees, income from auxiliary enterprises, and income from endowment. This is made clear in Table 26:
Table 26. Major Sources of Revenue Sources of Revenue 1996 % of all revenues 2003 % of all revenues all operating revenues 60.9 million - 97.8 million - tuition and fees 40.8 million 67.0% 68.5 million 70.0% income from auxiliary enterprises 9.5 million 15.6% 13.4 million 13.7% income from the endowment 4.6 million 7.6% 8.4 million 8.6%
There is no internal comparison of other units on campus since Teachers College is a stand-alone operation. Comparisons were not drawn with similar units at other institutions. The overall budget for Teachers College is adequate or more than adequate.
The College budget is developed based on a budget call from all instructional and non- instructional departments of the unit. Academic department budgets are not assigned by program, but based on the overall needs of the department. This allows for sufficient budget to cover coursework, clinical work, and supervision/mentoring work in the schools. Review of the 2002-2003 budgets indicates that the overall allocations for departments are roughly proportional to the size of the department in terms of number of faculty, candidates, and programs. No distinction is made between candidate needs based on their degree objectives except as individual programs justify their instructional resources required in the development of the department budget. The amount budgeted for Fiscal Year 2005 by department is presented in Table 27:
Table 27: Fiscal Year 2005 Budget by Department Department N of N of PE Fall 2003 FTE FY 2005 Budget Programs Programs Points Method Arts and Humanities 10 5 575.0 $4,782,796 Biobehavioral Studies 3 2 144.7 $1,964,424 Counseling and Clinical Psychology 2 1 320.7 $2,141,071 Curriculum and Teaching 7 7 351.3 $3,607,961 Health and Behavior Studies 5 3 313.6 $3,222,600 Human Development 4 0 132.3 $2,295,783 International and Transcultural Studies 4 1 227.3 $2,585,177 Mathematics, Science and Technology 3 3 245.9 $2,124,822 Organization and Leadership 8 2 517.5 $4,140,666
Teachers College supports many Centers, some supported by income, others supported by grant and research monies. In 2003-2004, Teachers College brought in approximately 28 million dollars in external funding: 10 million from federal grants, 12 million from foundations and corporate sources, six million from local sources, and $300,000 from state sources. Indirect cost rates vary by program and funding agency, but overhead recovery on all external grants and contracts contributed more than $4.0 million to the College’s operating budget in FY2003-2004.”
67 In the Strategic Plan for Teachers College (March 2004), faculty discussed at length the future of Teachers College and the target of reestablishing TC as the premier school of education in fact and in reputation. Realizing they are over 70 percent tuition driven, it was determined that higher auxiliary enterprise revenue and increased endowment income are needed. Likewise, Teachers College realizes it must increase student aid even further, although progress has been made. Student aid increased from 18 percent of total tuition income in 1996 to 20 percent by 2003. In summary, the unit has achieved balanced budgets or surpluses for the past eight to ten years. There have been rising revenues caused by increases in the number of students. The caution that accompanies those rising revenues is the concern that the trends will slow or reverse. They are very aware of these issues and planning well for the future years.
Professional development support is detailed in Standard 5. Teachers College has well defined and widespread support for faculty in the areas of teaching and scholarship, adequately supported by the unit’s budget.
C. Personnel
The professional education unit has sufficient numbers of full-time faculty to deliver and support its initial and advanced programs. The College has 156 full-time faculty members on appointment, 31 full-time instructors, and 39.6 FTE adjuncts. The overall number of students per faculty and other instructional staff was 18.9 in 2003. In the past two years, eleven new faculty positions were added to supplement teacher education programs. The positions were appointed as term positions; however, the longer term academic and budget impact will be studied by the faculty and administration for the potential to convert and/or extend the positions.
Teachers College has a well-articulated set of policies and guidelines regarding distribution of effort for the faculty. According to the faculty handbook, full-time faculty members are assigned a teaching load of four courses per academic year. All newly hired faculty members can take one-course release during the first year. In addition, all pre- tenured faculty members are allowed one additional year with a reduced load in the years prior to tenure.
The actual faculty supervision workload varies among programs. Programs use qualified professionals for candidate supervision in the field to supplement supervision by faculty. The number of candidates per supervision ranges between two and 12 (the higher number for only a few very senior and experienced supervisors). Faculty supervision loads are adjusted within their teaching load. Because of the relatively high expectations for scholarship, faculty are not expected to carry high supervision responsibilities.
The College is continually striving to examine workload equity. A committee of the TEPC is currently studying workload in teacher education. A report was submitted to the dean providing recommendations on four issues of workload equity: (1) articulation of fieldwork, supervision, and coordination of essentially 12-month programs; (2) equitable workloads among term-appointed faculty; (3) support of teacher/school personnel
68 preparation work as a long-term university policy; and (4) acknowledgement of field- based work in the tenure review process.
The College workload policies permit faculty to participate in a wide variety of scholarly and community service activities and are consistent with those of major research universities. Department chairs do have the discretion to adjust an individual faculty member’s workload, including teaching load, in the interest of special circumstances or to recognize unusually heavy responsibilities. However, faculty, particularly in the teacher education programs, reported a heavy load, particularly in student advisement. This was supported by interviews with candidates who believed that faculty workload was excessive. Faculty in programs preparing other school personnel did not report these same heavy advising loads.
In AY 2003-2004, Teachers College professional education programs employed 31 professors, 26 associate professors, and 26 assistant professors; 97 adjuncts, instructors, and lecturers; and 51 clinical faculty/supervisors of field experiences. The unit employs part-time faculty to augment course offerings and to supervise student teachers and interns. Part-time faculty enrich programs with their practical experiences and the professional knowledge they possess. These faculty members hold appropriate academic credentials and posses extensive professional experience in content areas they are assigned to teach or supervise. All adjunct faculty receive student course evaluations that are reviewed by department chairs. Most programs use some form of supervisor evaluations for field placements.
Every department has a specific number of graduate assistant positions. Regardless of how many positions a department/program is allotted, requests can be made of the dean’s office to fund additional graduate assistants based on need. Course assistants are provided for courses that have a large enrollment to alleviate some of the workload on the professors who teach them. One assistant is awarded for every class with 40 or more students.
There are sufficient numbers of administrators, support personnel, and student workers to efficiently maintain the programs offered by the College. Each of the nine departments has a person assigned as Department Chair, one department administrator, and a number of professional and clerical staff and student workers. Individual programs are provided with administrative and clerical support based on the size of the program and the program needs.
D. Unit facilities
Teachers College is housed in six academic buildings and six residential buildings. They are adjacent to the northern end of the Columbia University campus. The academic buildings include over 650,000 square feet and are located on one city block.
Over the past eight years, much work has been performed on the unit’s large physical plant. Major improvements have been made, particularly with respect to the physical and
69 technological infrastructure, as well as to selected instructional and event spaces. At the present time, improvements have been made or are in progress costing over $15 million. Two new or renovated computer labs have been funded at $200,000 and $300,000. The facilities (classrooms, offices, library) are sufficient to support all aspects of teaching and learning at Teachers College.
E. Unit resources including technology
Teachers College has successfully secured resources to support exemplary programs to ensure candidates meet standards. Faculty and candidates have access to extensive library collections, curricular and/or electronic information resources that serve both the unit and the broader constituency.
Teachers College Computer Information Services maintains a variety of technology resources that are available to support the efforts of faculty, staff, and candidates. These services include classrooms and labs, classweb help, email and network access, acquiring computers and software, media services and video, support and training, and technology initiatives.
In Table 26, found at the beginning of Unit Budget section, demonstrates that external resources (income from endowment and auxiliary enterprises) support the development of quality graduates at a rate of 20 to 25 percent each year. Tuition and fees account for 70 percent of the support, and the remainder of the budget (5% to 10%) is covered by external funding such as grants.
As stated above, only five to 10 percent of the operating budget is funded by external sources, exclusive of endowment and auxiliary incomes. The core of all programs is supported by the basic operating budget, including all faculty and staff support.
As detailed in Standard 2, the development of the unit assessment system was coordinated by the Assessment Subcommittee of the Teachers College Accreditation Team. There was sufficient personnel support from all constituents in the university as well as strong financial support from the university.
Faculty development in technology has been supported by a three-year project funded at 1.1. million dollars from the Department of Education’s Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers to Use Technology (PT3) program. The project, completed in 2004, assisted faculty in integrating technology into initial teacher education programs. Nine professional education programs started using E-portfolios for candidate learning and assessment.
Teachers College uses a Computing Student Services Survey to assess the quality of information technology resources and services and the extent to which Teachers College candidates use technology in their studies. Candidates’ satisfaction with these services was evidenced by a review of these survey results.
70 The Milbank Memorial Library at Teachers College is one of the nation’s largest and most comprehensive research libraries in education. The library has extensive research collections, comprising both current and historical materials. There are currently 603,200 printed volumes, with about 575,000 items in the substantial non-print collections.
The library also cooperates with Columbia University Libraries in developing and providing reciprocal access to research resources. Faculty, candidates, and staff at Teachers College may use or borrow materials held in Columbia University Libraries. Collectively, the 22 libraries of Columbia University have more than seven million books, nearly 2.5 million microforms, and over 11 million manuscripts. The relationship with Columbia University embraces access to over 400 online subscriptions databases in almost every academic area. Faculty and candidates users can access most of these recourses from both on and off campus, with a valid university network identification number and password.
The library also has outstanding collections of children’s books. Other distinctive collections include state and city curriculum materials, archives of large urban systems, publications of independent and private schools, professional association records, and historical educational and/or psychological tests.
Overall Assessment of Standard
Overall, Teachers College has a strong governance component with both excellent leadership and participation by the faculty. The faculty participate in the decision-making through two committees: the Faculty Executive Committee (FEC) and the Teacher Education Policy Committee (TEPC). Admission practices and related materials, such as publications, catalogs, and calendars are clearly stated and easily found. The unit’s budget process is fair and equitable. Sufficient funds are available to support the entire enterprise. There are sufficient personnel, on multiple levels, to carry out the mission. However faculty in the teacher education programs reported an excessive workload, particularly in student advisement, which impacted their ability to work effectively with candidates.
Recommendation: Met
Areas for Improvement:
New: There is a lack of consistency in workload across programs in the unit, resulting in differential quality of advising and counseling across programs.
Rationale: The heavy faculty load of scholarship, teaching, and service impacts the area of advising the 5,000-plus candidates in 28 programs. Advising is assigned and organized by program. Larger programs, especially at the master's level, may not have sufficient resources to carry out this responsibility well. Candidates and faculty raised this issue in numerous sessions.
71
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE
Documents reviewed: See attached.
Persons interviewed: See attached.
72
CORRECTIONS TO THE INSTITUTIONAL REPORT
73